, Volume 26, Issue 4, pp 2453–2470 | Cite as

Curaua and eucalyptus nanofiber films by continuous casting: mixture of cellulose nanocrystals and nanofibrils

  • Pedro ClaroEmail author
  • Adriana de Campos
  • Ana Corrêa
  • Vanessa Rodrigues
  • Bruno Luchesi
  • Luiz Silva
  • Gustavo Tonoli
  • Luiz Mattoso
  • José Marconcini
Original Research


Over the last few years, there has been a great interest in the production of cellulose nanofiber films. However, conventional casting and film with only one kind of nanofiber may give rise to brittle material. Furthermore, films formed by the mixture of cellulose nanocrystal (CNC) and cellulose nanofibril (CNF) by continuous casting have not been reported. In this way, this study aims to investigate the optical, thermal, mechanical, and physical properties of the mixture of CNC and CNF films obtained by continuous casting from curaua and eucalyptus fibers at the proportions of 0/100, 25/75, 50/50, 75/25, and 100/0 (% w/w). After continuous casting, neat CNC and neat CNF are cleared oriented, causing anisotropic mechanical properties. On the other hand, the mixture of CNC and CNF made the films mechanically more isotropic, even though some degree of orientation of the fibers. The films with a mixture of CNC/CNF 25/75 (% w/w) were more thermally stable. The addition of CNC in CNF films decreased their opacity. Thus, the type of nanofibers, the cellulose source, the process, and the mixture of CNC/CNF affect the properties of the films significantly.

Graphical abstract

CNC/CNF blend films obtained by continuous casting.


Nanofiber orientation Tensile strength Opacity Crystallinity index Degradation temperature 



The authors are grateful for the support provided by Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Level Personnel (CAPES), National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq), Federal University of Lavras (UFLA), Graduate Program in Materials Science and Engineering (PPGCEM), Federal University of Sao Carlos (UFSCar), Financier of Studies and Projects (FINEP), Brazilian Agricultural Research Corp. (Embrapa) and the Laboratory of Structural Characterization (LCE/DEMa/UFSCar) for the general facilities.


  1. Abbott JA (1999) Quality measurement of fruits and vegetables. Postharvest Biol Technol 15:207–225. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Araujo MAM, de Sena Neto AR, Hage E, Mattoso LHC, Marconcini JM (2015) Curaua leaf fiber (Ananas comosus var. erectifolius) reinforcing poly (lactic acid) biocomposites: formulation and performance. Polym Compos 36:1520–1530. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Arrieta MP, Fortunati E, Dominici F, Rayón E, López J, Kenny J (2014) PLA-PHB/cellulose based films: mechanical, barrier and disintegration properties. Polym Degrad Stab 107:139–149. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Árvores (2016) Relatório Anual Ibá 2016. Performance of planted trees. Accessed 8 January 2018
  5. Ballesteros JEM, dos Santos V, Mármol G, Frías M, Fiorelli J (2017) Potential of the hornification treatment on eucalyptus and pine fibers for fiber-cement applications. Cellulose 24:2275–2286. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bardet R, Reverdy C, Belgacem N, Leirset I, Syverud K, Bardet M, Bras J (2015) Substitution of nanoclay in high gas barrier films of cellulose nanofibrils with cellulose nanocrystals and thermal treatment. Cellulose 22:1227–1241. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Benítez A, Walther A (2017) Cellulose nanofibril nanopapers and bioinspired nanocomposites: a review to understand the mechanical property space. J Mater Chem A 5:16003–16024. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bras J, Viet D, Bruzzese C, Dufresne A (2011) Correlation between stiffness of sheets prepared from cellulose whiskers and nanoparticles dimensions. Carbohydr Polym 84:211–215. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bufalino L (2014) Filmes de nanocelulose a partir de resíduos madeireiros da Amazônia. Dissertation, Federal University of LavrasGoogle Scholar
  10. Bufalino L, de Sena Neto AR, Tonoli GHD, de Souza Fonseca A, Costa TG, Marconcini JM, Mendes LM (2015) How the chemical nature of Brazilian hardwoods affects nanofibrillation of cellulose fibers and film optical quality. Cellulose 22:3657–3672. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cherian BM, Leão AL, de Souza SF, Costa LMM, de Olyveira GM, Kottaisamy M, Thomas S (2011) Cellulose nanocomposites with nanofibres isolated from pineapple leaf fibers for medical applications. Carbohydr Polym 86:1790–1798. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Claro PIC, Corrêa AC, de Campos A, Rodrigues VB, Luchesi BR, Silva LE, Marconcini JM (2018) Curaua and eucalyptus nanofibers films by continuous casting: mechanical and thermal properties. Carbohydr Polym 181:1093–1101. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Corrêa AC, de Morais Teixeira E, Pessan LA, Mattoso LHC (2010) Cellulose nanofibers from curaua fibers. Cellulose 17:1183–1192. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Costa Correia V, Santos V, Sain M, Santos SF, Leão AL, Junior HS (2016) Grinding process for the production of nanofibrillated cellulose based on unbleached and bleached bamboo organosolv pulp. Cellulose 23:2971–2987. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Costa SV, Pingel P, Janietz S, Nogueira AF (2016) Inverted organic solar cells using nanocellulose as substrate. J Appl Polym Sci. Google Scholar
  16. Coutts RS (2005) A review of Australian research into natural fibre cement composites. Cement Concr Compos 27:518–526. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. French AD (2014) Idealized powder diffraction patterns for cellulose polymorphs. Cellulose 21:885–896. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gaspar D, Fernandes S, De Oliveira A, Fernandes J, Grey P, Pontes R, Fortunato E (2014) Nanocrystalline cellulose applied simultaneously as the gate dielectric and the substrate in flexible field effect transistors. Nanotechnology 25:094008. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gennadios A, Weller C, Hanna M, Froning G (1996) Mechanical and barrier properties of egg albumen films. J Food Sci 61:585–589. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hassan E, Wei Y, Jiao H, Hou YM (2012) Plant fibers reinforced poly (lactic acid)(PLA) as a green composites: review. Int J Eng Sci Technol 1:4429–4439Google Scholar
  21. Horseman T, Tajvidi M, Diop CI, Gardner DJ (2017) Preparation and property assessment of neat lignocellulose nanofibrils (LCNF) and their composite films. Cellulose 24(6):2455–2468CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Iwamoto S, Nakagaito A, Yano H (2007) Nano-fibrillation of pulp fibers for the processing of transparent nanocomposites. Appl Phys A 89:461–466. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Jonoobi M, Oladi R, Davoudpour Y, Oksman K, Dufresne A, Hamzeh Y, Davoodi R (2015) Different preparation methods and properties of nanostructured cellulose from various natural resources and residues: a review. Cellulose 22:935–969. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kim U-J, Eom SH, Wada M (2010) Thermal decomposition of native cellulose: influence on crystallite size. Polym Degrad Stab 95:778–781. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kim J-H, Mun S, Ko H-U, Yun G-Y, Kim J (2014) Disposable chemical sensors and biosensors made on cellulose paper. Nanotechnology 25:092001. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kim J-H, Shim BS, Kim HS, Lee Y-J, Min S-K, Jang D, Kim J (2015) Review of nanocellulose for sustainable future materials. Int J Precis Eng Manuf Green Technol 2:197–213. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kumar V, Bollström R, Yang A, Chen Q, Chen G, Salminen P, Toivakka M (2014) Comparison of nano-and microfibrillated cellulose films. Cellulose 21:3443–3456. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Langford JI, Wilson A (1978) Scherrer after sixty years: a survey and some new results in the determination of crystallite size. J Appl Crystallogr 11:102–113. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Leao AL, Caraschi JC, Tan I (2000) Curaua fiber—a tropical natural fibers from Amazon potential and applications in composites. In: Natural polymers and agrofibers bases compositesGoogle Scholar
  30. Lima CF, Barbosa LCA, Marcelo CR, Silvério FO, Colodette JL (2008) Comparison between analytical pyrolysis and nitrobenzene oxidation for determination of syringyl/guaiacyl ratio in Eucalyptus spp. lignin. Bioresources 3:701–712Google Scholar
  31. Lundahl MJ, Cunha AG, Rojo E, Papageorgiou AC, Rautkari L, Arboleda JC, Rojas OJ (2016) Strength and water interactions of cellulose I filaments wet-spun from cellulose nanofibril hydrogels. Sci Rep 6:30695. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Macrae CF, Bruno IJ, Chisholm JA, Edgington PR, McCabe P, Pidcock E, Wood PA (2008) Mercury CSD 2.0—new features for the visualization and investigation of crystal structures. J Appl Crystallogr 41:466–470. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Nair SS, Zhu J, Deng Y, Ragauskas AJ (2014) High performance green barriers based on nanocellulose. Sustain Chem Process 2:23. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Neto ARS, Araujo MA, Barboza RM, Fonseca AS, Tonoli GH, Souza FV, Marconcini JM (2015) Comparative study of 12 pineapple leaf fiber varieties for use as mechanical reinforcement in polymer composites. Ind Crops Prod 64:68–78. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Paschoalick T, Garcia F, Sobral PA, Habitante A (2003) Characterization of some functional properties of edible films based on muscle proteins of Nile Tilapia. Food Hydrocoll 17:419–427. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Pathare PB, Opara UL, Al-Said FAJ (2013) Colour measurement and analysis in fresh and processed foods: a review. Food Bioprocess Technol 6:36–60. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Poletto M, Zattera AJ, Forte MM, Santana RM (2012) Thermal decomposition of wood: influence of wood components and cellulose crystallite size. Biores Technol 109:148–153. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Poletto M, Ornaghi HL, Zattera AJ (2014) Native cellulose: structure, characterization and thermal properties. Materials 7:6105–6119. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Poplin JH, Swatloski RP, Holbrey JD, Spear SK, Metlen A, Grätzel M, Rogers RD (2007) Sensor technologies based on a cellulose supported platform. Chem Commun. Google Scholar
  40. Rosa M, Medeiros E, Malmonge J, Gregorski K, Wood D, Mattoso L, Imam S (2010) Cellulose nanowhiskers from coconut husk fibers: effect of preparation conditions on their thermal and morphological behavior. Carbohydr Polym 81:83–92. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Segal L, Creely JJ, Martin AE, Conrad CM (1959) An empirical method for estimating the degree of crystallinity of native cellulose using X-ray diffractometer. Text Res J 29:786–794. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Sehaqui H, Liu A, Zhou Q, Berglund LA (2010) Fast preparation procedure for large, flat cellulose and cellulose/inorganic nanopaper structures. Biomacromolecules 11:2195–2198. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Siqueira G, Bras J, Dufresne A (2010) Luffa cylindrica as a lignocellulosic source of fiber, microfibrillated cellulose and cellulose nanocrystals. Bioresources 5:727–740Google Scholar
  44. Siró I, Plackett D (2010) Microfibrillated cellulose and new nanocomposite materials: a review. Cellulose 17:459–494. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Spence KL, Venditti RA, Rojas OJ, Habibi Y, Pawlak JJ (2011) A comparative study of energy consumption and physical properties of microfibrillated cellulose produced by different processing methods. Cellulose 18:1097–1111. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Wang N, Ding E, Cheng R (2007) Thermal degradation behaviors of spherical cellulose nanocrystals with sulfate groups. Polymer 48:3486–3493. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Wang Q, Zhu J, Considine JM (2013) Strong and optically transparent films prepared using cellulosic solid residue recovered from cellulose nanocrystals production waste stream. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces 5:2527–2534. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Xu C, Zhu S, Xing C, Li D, Zhu N, Zhou H (2015) Isolation and properties of cellulose nanofibrils from coconut palm petioles by different mechanical process. PLoS ONE 10:e0122123. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Xu X, Zhou J, Jiang L, Lubineau G, Ng T, Ooi BS, Zhu J (2016) Highly transparent, low-haze, hybrid cellulose nanopaper as electrodes for flexible electronics. Nanoscale 8(24):12294–12306CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Yamane C, Aoyagi T, Ago M, Sato K, Okajima K, Takahashi T (2006) Two different surface properties of regenerated cellulose due to structural anisotropy. Polym J 38:819CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Zhou Y, Khan TM, Liu J-C, Fuentes-Hernandez C, Shim JW, Najafabadi E, Kippelen B (2014) Efficient recyclable organic solar cells on cellulose nanocrystal substrates with a conducting polymer top electrode deposited by film-transfer lamination. Org Electron 15:661–666. CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Graduate Program in Materials Science and Engineering (PPG-CEM)Federal University of São CarlosSão CarlosBrazil
  2. 2.National Nanotechnology Laboratory for Agribusiness (LNNA)Embrapa InstrumentationSão CarlosBrazil
  3. 3.Department of ChemistryFederal University of Sao CarlosSão CarlosBrazil
  4. 4.Forest Science DepartmentFederal University of LavrasLavrasBrazil

Personalised recommendations