Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Experimental study demonstrates optimal reinforcement in polypropylene-Malva sylvestris biocomposites using 5 wt% EBAGMA, indicating potential for sustainable structural materials.
This study investigates the potential of Malva sylvestris fibers as sustainable reinforcements for polypropylene (PP)‐based biocomposites. A comprehensive characterization was conducted to evaluate the structural, morphological, thermal, mechanical, rheological, and surface properties of PP biocomposites reinforced with 20 wt% Malva fibers. To enhance the interfacial compatibility between the hydrophobic PP matrix and the hydrophilic fibers, ethylene‐butyl acrylate‐glycidyl methacrylate (EBAGMA) was incorporated at 5 and 10 wt%. Scanning electron microscopy revealed improved fiber/matrix adhesion in the presence of EBAGMA, particularly at 5 wt%. Differential scanning calorimetry showed a significant increase in the degree of crystallinity from 43% for neat PP to 65% for the PP/MF/5EBAGMA biocomposite. Mechanical characterization demonstrated a marked improvement in stiffness, with the tensile modulus increasing from 1445.6 MPa for neat PP to 2058.1 MPa for PP/MF/5EBAGMA. Furthermore, the microhardness increased from 11.5 HV to 45.2 HV, indicating enhanced surface resistance. Rheological measurements indicated a marked increase in complex viscosity at low frequencies (< 0.1 Hz), suggesting a more interconnected microstructure due to enhanced compatibilization between the PP matrix and Malva fibers. Contact‐angle measurements also indicated reduced surface wettability and improved matrix/fiber compatibility. However, using 10 wt% EBAGMA led to lower overall performance than the 5 wt% formulation, likely due to excess compatibilizer, interfacial saturation, and local heterogeneity. Overall, the PP/Malva biocomposites compatibilized with 5 wt% EBAGMA appear to be the most promising formulation for the development of bio‐based structural materials.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yalaoui et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: