Advertisement

Journal of Polymers and the Environment

, Volume 27, Issue 9, pp 2078–2088 | Cite as

Enhanced Mechanical and Barrier Performance of Poly (Lactic Acid) Based Nanocomposites Using Surface Acetylated Starch Nanocrystals

  • Pooja Takkalkar
  • Gregory Griffin
  • Nhol KaoEmail author
Original paper
  • 38 Downloads

Abstract

Poly (lactic) acid (PLA) based nanocomposites reinforced with starch nanocrystals (SNC) extracted from high amylopectin waxy maize starch and acetylated starch nanocrystals (Ac-SNC), were prepared and their influence on the overall properties of PLA nanocomposites were studied. The two nanofillers (SNC and Ac-SNC) were incorporated in PLA at two different loadings (1 and 3 wt%) by solvent casting and evaporation technique. Surface acetylation of SNC was confirmed by Fourier Transform infra-red spectroscopy and nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy and the crystalline structure by X-ray diffraction. This paper reports the influence of incorporating unacetylated and surface acetylated starch nanocrystals on morphological, barrier, mechanical, and rheological properties of PLA based nanocomposites. While both nanofillers improved the properties of PLA, the PLA-Ac-SNC had superior properties to that of PLA-SNC nanocomposites, due to better filler dispersion and interaction with the polymer matrix. These sustainable nanocomposites with improved properties will expand the application of these bio-sourced starch nanocrystals.

Graphical Abstract

Keywords

Polylactic acid Starch nanocrystals Acetylation Nanocomposites Interfacial interaction 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The research work reported in this paper was funded by the RMIT University, Melbourne, VIC 3001, Australia. The authors are grateful to Dr Robert Brkljaca and Sunly Prum from the School of Science, RMIT University for their assistance with NMR, and Mike Allan and Dr Muthu Pannirselvam from the School of Engineering, RMIT University for their assistance with the Mocon and Rheological analysis. The authors acknowledge the facilities, and the scientific and technical assistance of the RMIT University’s Microscopy & Microanalysis Facility (RMMF), a linked laboratory of the Australian Microscopy & Microanalysis Research Facility.

References

  1. 1.
    Scaffaro R et al (2017) Polysaccharide nanocrystals as fillers for PLA based nanocomposites. Cellulose 24(2):447–478Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Arrieta MP et al (2014) Multifunctional PLA-PHB/cellulose nanocrystal films: processing, structural and thermal properties. Carbohyd Polym 107:16–24Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Auras R, Harte B, Selke S (2004) An overview of polylactides as packaging materials. Macromol Biosci 4(9):835–864Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Fortunati E et al (2012) Effects of modified cellulose nanocrystals on the barrier and migration properties of PLA nano-biocomposites. Carbohyd Polym 90(2):948–956Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kasa SN, Omar MF, Ismail IN (2017) Characterization and properties of acetylated nanocrystalline cellulose (aNC) reinforced polylactic acid (PLA) polymer. AIP Conf Proc 1901(1):030014Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Spinella S et al (2015) Modification of cellulose nanocrystals with lactic acid for direct melt blending with PLA. 1664: 070019Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Mukherjee T et al (2017) Chemically imaging the interaction of acetylated nanocrystalline cellulose (NCC) with a polylactic acid (PLA) polymer matrix. Cellulose 24(4):1717–1729Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Yu J et al (2008) Structure and mechanical properties of poly(lactic acid) filled with (starch nanocrystal)-graft -poly(ε -caprolactone). Macromol Mater Eng 293(9):763–770Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Garcia NL et al (2012) Biodegradable materials from grafting of modified PLA onto starch nanocrystals. Polym Degrad Stab 97(10):2021–2026Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Espino-Pérez E et al (2016) Nanocomposites with functionalised polysaccharide nanocrystals through aqueous free radical polymerisation promoted by ozonolysis. Carbohyd Polym 135:256–266Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Takkalkar P et al (2018) Preparation of square-shaped starch nanocrystals/polylactic acid based bio-nanocomposites: morphological, structural, thermal and rheological properties. Waste Biomass Valor.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12649-018-0372-0 Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Singh AA et al (2018) Synergistic effect of chitin nanocrystals and orientations induced by solid-state drawing on PLA-based nanocomposite tapes. Compos Sci Technol 162:140–145Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Pal AK, Katiyar V (2016) Nanoamphiphilic chitosan dispersed poly (lactic acid) bionanocomposite films with improved thermal, mechanical, and gas barrier properties. Biomacromol 17(8):2603–2618Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Pal AK et al (2017) Chemomechanical, morphological, and rheological studies of chitosan-graft-lactic acid oligomer reinforced poly(lactic acid) bionanocomposite films. J Appl Polym Sci 135:45546Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Arrieta MP et al (2015) Bionanocomposite films based on plasticized PLA–PHB/cellulose nanocrystal blends. Carbohyd Polym 121(Supplement C):265–275Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Herrera N et al (2016) Plasticized polylactic acid nanocomposite films with cellulose and chitin nanocrystals prepared using extrusion and compression molding with two cooling rates: effects on mechanical, thermal and optical properties. Compos A Appl Sci Manuf 83:89–97Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sungsanit K et al (2010) Physical and rheological properties of plasticized linear and branched PLA. Korea-Aust Rheol J 22(3):187–195Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Sungsanit K, Kao N, Bhattacharya S (2012) Properties of linear poly (lactic acid)/polyethylene glycol blends. Polym Eng Sci 52(1):108–116Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Petinakis E et al (2010) Biodegradation and thermal decomposition of poly(lactic acid)-based materials reinforced by hydrophilic fillers. Polym Degrad Stab 95(9):1704–1707Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Fortunati E et al (2012) New multifunctional poly(lactide acid) composites: mechanical, antibacterial, and degradation properties. J Appl Polym Sci 124(1):87–98Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Tolstoguzov V (2004) Why are polysaccharides necessary? Food Hydrocolloids 18(5):873–877Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Rong SY, Mubarak NM, Tanjung FA (2017) Structure-property relationship of cellulose nanowhiskers reinforced chitosan biocomposite films. J Environ Chem Eng 5(6):6132–6136Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Wei B et al (2014) Surface chemical compositions and dispersity of starch nanocrystals formed by sulfuric and hydrochloric acid hydrolysis. PLoS ONE 9(2):e86024Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Zhang G et al (2018) Crystallization of green poly (ε-caprolactone) nanocomposites with starch nanocrystal: the nucleation role switching of starch nanocrystal with its surface acetylation. Ind Eng Chem Res 57(18):6257–6264Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Angellier H, Molina-Boisseau S, Dufresne A (2005) Mechanical properties of waxy maize starch nanocrystal reinforced natural rubber. Macromolecules 38(22):9161–9170Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Angellier H et al (2005) Processing and structural properties of waxy maize starch nanocrystals reinforced natural rubber. Macromolecules 38(9):3783–3792Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kristo E, Biliaderis CG (2007) Physical properties of starch nanocrystal-reinforced pullulan films. Carbohyd Polym 68(1):146–158Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Zheng H et al (2009) Structure and properties of starch nanocrystal-reinforced soy protein plastics. Polym Compos 30(4):474–480Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Chen G et al (2008) Simultaneous reinforcing and toughening: new nanocomposites of waterborne polyurethane filled with low loading level of starch nanocrystals. Polymer 49(7):1860–1870Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Angellier H et al (2006) Thermoplastic starch—waxy maize starch nanocrystals nanocomposites. Biomacromol 7(2):531–539Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Piyada K, Waranyou S, Thawien W (2012) Mechanical, thermal and structural properties of rice starch films reinforced with rice starch nanocrystals. Int Food Res J 20(1):439–449Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Xu C, Chen C, Wu D (2018) The starch nanocrystal filled biodegradable poly(ε-caprolactone) composite membrane with highly improved properties. Carbohyd Polym 182:115–122Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Yin Z et al (2015) Preparation and properties of cross-linked starch nanocrystals/polylactic acid nanocomposites. Int J Polym Sci 2015:5Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Shanmugarajah B et al (2019) Valorization of palm oil agro-waste into cellulose biosorbents for highly effective textile effluent remediation. J Clean Prod 210:697–709Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Yee MJ et al (2018) Synthesis of polyvinyl alcohol (PVA) infiltrated MWCNTs buckypaper for strain sensing application. Sci Rep 8(1):17295Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Jun LY et al (2019) Immobilization of peroxidase on functionalized MWCNTs-buckypaper/polyvinyl alcohol nanocomposite membrane. Sci Rep 9(1):2215Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Lin N et al (2011) Surface acetylation of cellulose nanocrystal and its reinforcing function in poly(lactic acid). Carbohyd Polym 83(4):1834–1842Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Robles E et al (2015) Surface-modified nano-cellulose as reinforcement in poly(lactic acid) to conform new composites. Ind Crops Prod 71:44–53Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Angellier H et al (2004) Optimization of the preparation of aqueous suspensions of waxy maize starch nanocrystals using a response surface methodology. Biomacromol 5(4):1545–1551Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Xu Y et al (2010) Preparation and characterization of organic-soluble acetylated starch nanocrystals. Carbohyd Polym 80(4):1078–1084Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Xiao H et al (2016) Acetylated starch nanocrystals: preparation and antitumor drug delivery study. Int J Biol Macromol 89:456–464Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    LeCorre D, Bras J, Dufresne A (2011) Influence of botanic origin and amylose content on the morphology of starch nanocrystals. J Nanopart Res 13(12):7193–7208Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Wang YJ, Wang L (2002) Characterization of acetylated waxy maize starches prepared under catalysis by different alkali and alkaline-earth hydroxides. Starch-Stärke 54(1):25–30Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Putaux J-L et al (2003) Platelet nanocrystals resulting from the disruption of waxy maize starch granules by acid hydrolysis. Biomacromol 4(5):1198Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Jonoobi M et al (2012) A comparison of modified and unmodified cellulose nanofiber reinforced polylactic acid (PLA) prepared by twin screw extrusion. J Polym Environ 20(4):991–997Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Nizamuddin S et al (2019) Synthesis and characterization of polylactide/rice husk hydrochar composite. Sci Rep 9(1):5445Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Fortunati E et al (2012) Effects of modified cellulose nanocrystals on the barrier and migration properties of PLA nano-biocomposites. Carbohyd Polym 90(2):948–956Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Fortunati E et al (2015) Processing of PLA nanocomposites with cellulose nanocrystals extracted from Posidonia oceanica waste: innovative reuse of coastal plant. Ind Crops Prod 67:439–447Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Lin N et al (2011) Poly(butylene succinate)-based biocomposites filled with polysaccharide nanocrystals: structure and properties. Polym Compos 32(3):472–482Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Kargarzadeh H et al (2018) Recent developments in nanocellulose-based biodegradable polymers, thermoplastic polymers, and porous nanocomposites. Prog Polym Sci 87:197Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Zhang G et al (2018) Green poly (β-hydroxybutyrate)/starch nanocrystal composites: tuning the nucleation and spherulite morphology through surface acetylation of starch nanocrystal. Carbohyd Polym 195:79–88Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Arrieta MP et al (2014) PLA-PHB/cellulose based films: mechanical, barrier and disintegration properties. Polym Degrad Stab 107:139–149Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Cazón P et al (2017) Polysaccharide-based films and coatings for food packaging: a review. Food Hydrocolloids 68(Supplement C):136–148Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Garcia NL et al (2009) Physico-mechanical properties of biodegradable starch nanocomposites. Macromol Mater Eng 294(3):169–177Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Duan B et al (2011) Preparation and properties of starch nanocrystals/carboxymethyl chitosan nanocomposite films. Starch-Stärke 63(9):528–535Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    LeCorre D et al (2014) All starch nanocomposite coating for barrier material. J Appl Polym Sci.  https://doi.org/10.1002/app.39826 Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Condés MC et al (2018) Composite and nanocomposite films based on amaranth biopolymers. Food Hydrocolloids 74(Supplement C):159–167Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Huang F-Y et al (2015) Preparation and properties of cellulose laurate (CL)/starch nanocrystals acetate (SNA) bio-nanocomposites. Polymers 7(7):1331–1345Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Chen Y et al (2008) Comparative study on the films of poly(vinyl alcohol)/pea starch nanocrystals and poly(vinyl alcohol)/native pea starch. Carbohyd Polym 73(1):8–17Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Viguie J, Molina-Boisseau S, Dufresne A (2007) Processing and characterization of waxy maize starch films plasticized by sorbitol and reinforced with starch nanocrystals. Macromol Biosci 7(11):1206–1216Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Li X et al (2015) Mechanical, barrier and morphological properties of starch nanocrystals-reinforced pea starch films. Carbohyd Polym 121:155–162Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Ren L et al (2016) Performance improvement of starch films reinforced with starch nanocrystals (SNCs) modified by cross-linking. Starch/Staerke 69:1600025Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Chang PR et al (2008) Effects of starch nanocrystal-graft-porycaprolactone on mechanical properties of waterborne polyurethane-based nanocomposites. J Appl Polym Sci 111(2):619–627Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Bel Haaj S et al (2016) Starch nanocrystals and starch nanoparticles from waxy maize as nanoreinforcement: a comparative study. Carbohyd Polym 143:310Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Condes MC et al (2015) Amaranth protein films reinforced with maize starch nanocrystals. Food Hydrocolloids 47:146–157Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Yan M, Li S, Zhang M, Li C, Dong F, Li W (2013) Characterization of surface acetylated nanocrystalline cellulose by single-step method. BioResources 8:6330Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Bondeson D, Oksman K (2007) Polylactic acid/cellulose whisker nanocomposites modified by polyvinyl alcohol. Compos A Appl Sci Manuf 38(12):2486–2492Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Zhao J, Morgan AB, Harris JD (2005) Rheological characterization of polystyrene–clay nanocomposites to compare the degree of exfoliation and dispersion. Polymer 46(20):8641–8660Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Kamal MR, Khoshkava V (2015) Effect of cellulose nanocrystals (CNC) on rheological and mechanical properties and crystallization behavior of PLA/CNC nanocomposites. Carbohyd Polym 123:105–114Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    Mukherjee T et al (2013) Improved dispersion of cellulose microcrystals in polylactic acid (PLA) based composites applying surface acetylation. Chem Eng Sci 101:655–662Google Scholar
  71. 71.
    Gupta A et al (2017) Rheological and thermo-mechanical properties of poly(lactic acid)/lignin-coated cellulose nanocrystal composites. ACS Sustain Chem Eng 5(2):1711–1720Google Scholar
  72. 72.
    Narimissa E et al (2015) The comparison between the effects of solvent casting and melt intercalation mixing processes on different characteristics of polylactide-nanographite platelets composites. Polym Eng Sci 55(7):1560–1570Google Scholar
  73. 73.
    Kashi S et al (2018) Phase transition and anomalous rheological behaviour of polylactide/graphene nanocomposites. Compos B Eng 135:25–34Google Scholar
  74. 74.
    Mukherjee T et al (2014) Dispersion study of nanofibrillated cellulose based poly(butylene adipate-co-terephthalate) composites. Carbohyd Polym 102:537–542Google Scholar
  75. 75.
    Sabzi M et al (2013) Graphene nanoplatelets as poly(lactic acid) modifier: linear rheological behavior and electrical conductivity. J Mater Chem A 1(28):8253–8261Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Chemical and Environmental Engineering, School of EngineeringRMIT UniversityMelbourneAustralia

Personalised recommendations