Advertisement

Designing kaolin-reinforced bionanocomposites of poly(vinyl alcohol)/gelatin and study of their mechanical and water vapor transmission behavior

  • Manjulata Shrungi
  • Anjana Goswami
  • Jaya Bajpai
  • A. K. BajpaiEmail author
Original Paper
  • 23 Downloads

Abstract

In the present work, gelatin/PVA–kaolin nanocomposites were prepared by dispersing kaolin into a host matrix of gelatin/PVA to cause exfoliation of the added clay. The DSC, FTIR, AFM and XRD techniques were used to characterize the prepared bionanocomposite materials. The crystalline nature and the three-dimensional surface topology at nano-scales of the bionanocomposite films were confirmed by the XRD and AFM analysis, respectively. The morphological insights of synthesized materials were obtained by scanning electron microscopy which suggested for a compact and homogenous surface architecture. The FTIR spectral results indicated that the kaolin was exfoliated within the host matrix of gelatin–PVA. Swelling nature and water vapor transmission studies were conducted, and the results obtained suggested that the swelling ratio and water vapor transmission rate of bionanocomposite decreased with increasing amount of the kaolin content. The tensile strength measurements of the bionanocomposite film provided information about the mechanical behavior of the material. The prepared bionanocomposite films were also studied for their microhardness property. Mechanical and barrier properties were found to increase with the addition of kaolin thus indicating the suitability of the as-prepared material for applications in food packaging.

Keywords

Nanocomposite Clay AFM Barrier 

Notes

References

  1. 1.
    Marandi GB, Mahdavilnia GR, Ghafary S (2011) Swelling behaviour of novel protein-based superabsorbent nanocomposite. J Appl Polym Sci 120:1170–1179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Wang W, Wang A (2009) Preparation, characterization and properties of superabsorbent nanocomposites based on natural guar gum modified rectorite. Carbohyd Polym 77:891–897CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kevadiya BD, Joshi GV, Mody HM, Bajaj HC (2011) Biopolymer–clay hydrogel composites as drug carrier: host–guest intercalation and in vitro release study of lidocaine hydrochloride. Appl Clay Sci 52:364–367CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Marandi BG, Mahdavilnia GR, Ghafary S (2011) Swelling behaviour of noval protein-based superabsorbent nanocomposite. J Appl Polym Sci 20:1170–1179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Tunc S, Duman O (2010) Preparation and characterization of biodegradable methyl cellulose/montmorillonite nanocomposite films. Appl Clay Sci 48(3):414–424CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Wang K, Chen L, Kotaki M, He C (2007) Preparation, microstructure of and thermal mechanical properties epoxy/crude clay nanocomposites. Compos Part A 38(1):192–197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ward AG, Courts A (1977) The science and technology of gelatine. Academic Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Huang Y, Onyeri S, Siewe M, Moshfeghian M, Madihally SV (2005) In vitro characterization of chitosan–gelatin scaffolds for tissue engineering. Biomaterials 36:7616–7627CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gennadios A, McHugh TH, Weller CL, Krochta JM (1994) Edible coatings and films based on proteins. In: Krochta JM, Baldwin EA, Nisperos-Carriedo M (eds) Edible coatings and films to improve food quality. Technomic Publishing Company, Inc, Lancaster, pp 201–277Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Tharanathan RN (2003) Biodegradable films and composite coatings: past, present and future. Trends Food Sci Technol 14:71–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Matsumura S, Tomizawa N, Toki K, Toshima K (1993) Noval poly(vinyl alcohol)-degrading enzyme and the degradation mechanism. Macromolecules 32:7753–7761CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lainioti GC, Bounos G, Voyiatzis GA, Kallitsis JK (2016) Enhanced water vapor transmission through porous membranes based on melt blending of polystyrene sulfonate with polyethylene copolymers and their CNT nanocomposites. Polymer 8:190–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Othman SH, Edwal SAM, Risyon NP, Basha RK, Talib RA (2017) Water sorption and water permeability properties of edible film made from potato peel waste. Food Sci Technol 37(1):63–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Requena VHC, Rivas BL, Perez MA (2015) Polymer/clay nanocomposite films as active packaging material: modeling of antimicrobial release. Eur Polym J 71:461–475CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ignatova M, Starbova K, Manolova N, Rashkov I (2006) Electrospun nano-fibre mats with antibacterial properties from quaternised chitosan and poly(vinyl alcohol). Carbohydr Res 341:2098–2107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hedenqvist MS, Backman A, Gallstedt M, Boyd RH, Gedde UW (2006) Morphology and diffusion properties of whey/montemorillonite nanocomposites. Compos Sci Technol 66:2350–2359CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kovacevic E, Stefanovic I, Bemdt J, Godde C, Winter J, Boufendi L (2008) The nanoparticle formation in hydrocarbon plasmas. Publication de Observatoire Astornomique de Beograd 84:151–152Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Nayak PS, Singh BK (2007) Instrumental characterization of clay by XRF, XRD and FTIR. Bull Mater Sci 30:235–240CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Alshabnant M, AI-Arrash A, Mekhamer W (2013) Polystyrene/montmorillonite nanocomposites. Study of the morphology and effects of sonication time on thermal stability. J Nanomater 9:1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Theng BKG (1974) The chemistry of clay–organic reactions. Adam Hilger Ltd, Rank Precision Industries, LondonGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    AbdAlla SG, EL-Din HMN, EL-Naggar AVM (2007) Electron beam synthesis and characterization of poly(vinyl alcohol)/montmorrilonite nanocomposites. Compos Part A 38:192–197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Paul DR, Robeson LM (2008) Polymer nanotechnology. Nanocompos Polym 49:3187–3204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ekosse GE (2010) Kaolin deposits and occurrences in Africa: geology, mineralogy and utilization. Appl Clay Sci 50:212–236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Diko ML, Ekosse GE, Ayonghe SN, Ntasin E (2011) Physical characterization of clay materials from Tertiary volcanic cones in Limbe (Cameroon) for ceramic applications. Appl Clay Sci 51:380–384CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Schwartz SS, Goodman SH (1982) Plastic materials and processes. Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    ASTM (2014) Standard test methods for WV transmission of materials, Designatoin E/96/E96M-14 ASTM international, West ConshohockenGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Al-Saidi GS, Al-Alawi A, Rahman MS, Guizani N (2012) Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) spectroscopic study of extracted gelatin from shaari (Lithrinusmicrodon) skin: effects of extraction conditions. Int Food Res J 19:1167–1173Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Reisa EF, Fábia SA, Lagea AP, Leitea RC, Heneineb LG, Vasconcelosc WL, Lobatoa ZP, Mansurc HS (2006) Synthesis and characterization of poly(vinyl alcohol) hydrogels and hybrids for rMPB70 protein adsorption. Mater Res 9:185–191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Ekosse GE (2005) Fourier transform infrared spectrophotometry and X-ray powder diffractometry as complementary techniques in characterizing clay size fraction of kaolin. J Appl Sci Environ 9(2):43–48Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Worsithi N, Goodman BA, Neampan J, Jeyachoke N, Thiravetyan P (2011) Characterization of modified kaolin from the Ranong deposit Thailand by XRD, XRF, SEM, FTIR and EPR techniques. Clay Miner 46:539–559CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Bailey SW (1984) In: Brindley GW, Brown G (eds) Crystal structures of clay minerals and their X-ray identification, 2nd edn. Mineralogical Society, London, pp 1–124Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Das MP, Suguna PR, Prasad K, Vijaylakshmi JV, Renuka M (2017) Extraction and characterization of gelatin: a functional biopolymer. Int J Pharm Pharm Sci 9:239–242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Panda AK, Mishra BG, Mishra DK, Singha RK (2010) Effect of sulphuric acid treatment on the physico-chemical characteristics of kaolin clay. Colloids Surf A Physicochem Eng Asp 363:98–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Plan A, Giese RF, Snyde DR (1988) The Hinkley index for kaolinites. Clay Miner 23:249–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Kumari CM, Bhat KM, Bansal R (2016) Evaluation of surface roughness of different restorative composites after polishing using atomic force microscopy. J Conserv Dent 19:56–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Tabor J (2010) Investigating the investigative task: testing for skewness—an investigation of different test statistics and their power to detect skewness. J Stat Educ 18:1–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Joanes DN, Gill CA (1998) Comparing measures of sample skewness and kurtosis. J R Stat Soc 47:183–189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Andraud C, Beghdadi A, Lafait J (1994) Entropic analysis of random morphologies. Phys A Stat Mech Appl 207:208–212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Guirguis O, Moselhey M (2012) Thermal and structural studies of poly(vinyl alcohol) and hydroxypropyl cellulose blends. Nat Sci 4:57–67Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Pal K, Banthia AK, Majumdar DK (2007) Preparation and characterization of polyvinyl alcohol–gelatin hydrogel membranes for biomedical applications. AAPS PharmSciTech 8:E142–E146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Fakirov S (2007) Gelatin and gelatin-based biodegradable composites: manufacturing, properties and biodegradation behaviour. Handbook of engineering biopolymers homopolymers, blends, and composites. Carl Hanser, MunichCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Wang H-W, Dong R-X, Liu C-L, Chang H-Y (2007) Effect of clay on properties of polyimide–clay nanocomposites. J Appl Polym Sci 104:318–324CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Silva GGD, Sobral PJA, Carvalho RA, Bergo PVA, Mendieta-Taboada O (2008) Biodegradable films based on blends of gelatin and poly(vinyl alcohol): effect of PVA type or concentration on some physical properties of films. J Polym Environ.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10924-008-0112-9 Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    ASTM (2010) Standard test method for tensile properties of thin plastic sheeting D882-10. ASTM, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Mohammed JH (2015) Tensile and compressive properties of kaolin reinforced epoxy. Al Khwarizmi Eng J 11:96–101Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Jorge MFC, Aleixandre EMC, Flaker CHC, Bittante AMQB, Sobral PJDM (2015) Biodegradable films based on gelatin and montmorillonite produced by spreading. Int J Polym Sci 2015:1–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Tabari M (2017) Investigation of carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC) on mechanical properties of coldwater fish gelatin biodegradable edible films. Foods 6:41–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Chinnan M, Park H (1995) Effect of plasticizer level and temperature on water vapour transmission of cellulose-based edible films. J Food Process Eng 18:417–419CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Lainioti GC, Bounos G, Voyiatzis GA, Kallitsis JK (2016) Enhanced water vapour transmission through porous membranes based on melt blending of polystyrene sulfonate with polyethylene copolymers and their CNT nanocomposites. Polymers 8:190–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Spence KL, Venditti RA, Rojas OJ, Pawlak JJ, Hubb MA (2011) Water vapour barrier properties of coated and filled micro fibrillated cellulose composite films. BioResources 6(4):4370–4388Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Sahin HT (2007) RF-CF4 Plasma surface modification of paper: chemical evolution of two sideness with XPS/ATR-FTIR. J Appl Surface Sci 253:4367–4373CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Manjulata Shrungi
    • 1
  • Anjana Goswami
    • 1
  • Jaya Bajpai
    • 1
  • A. K. Bajpai
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Bose Memorial Research Laboratory, Department of ChemistryGovernment Autonomous Science CollegeJabalpurIndia

Personalised recommendations