Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Experimental evaluation demonstrates cleaner vegetable tanning alternatives for tilapia leather, suggesting tara and quebracho reduce environmental risks despite lower mechanical strength.
[Cr(VI)] released from conventional chrome-tanned leathers poses severe environmental and occupational risks and complicates the circular use of tannery wastes. Valorizing tilapia skins into leather requires chromium-free tanning to meet footwear requirements. This study integrates Design of Experiments (DOE), Quality Function Deployment (QFD), and Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) to compare three vegetable tanning systems – mimosa, quebracho, and tara – against a chrome-tanned reference for tilapia leather. DOE quantifies vegetable tanning agent type effects and formulation level on shrinkage temperature, tensile strength, elongation at break, and thickness; QFD translates the voice of footwear designers into weighted technical priorities; and FMEA evaluates chrome-tanned risks. Mimosa had the highest vegetable-system shrinkage temperature (∼ 80 oC mean), yet failed to consistently meet the ≥ 80 oC QFD target. Tara and quebracho exhibited superior tensile strength and elongation at break, with lower thickness variability. While vegetable systems still lag behind chrome tanning (26.8 ± 2.7Nmm2) in mechanical performance, they reduced overall RPNs by ∼60% versus chrome-tanned benchmarks. Thus, tara and quebracho offer the most balanced performance for metal-free tilapia leather, whereas mimosa is best suited as a stabilizing agent in blends. The integrated DOE–QFD–FMEA framework provides transparent, decision-ready support for cleaner production transitions in leather and other bio-based materials.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gómez-García et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: