Journal of Polymers and the Environment

, Volume 26, Issue 7, pp 3005–3016 | Cite as

Multiple Reprocessing Cycles of Corn Starch-Based Biocomposites Reinforced with Curauá Fiber

  • Denise Maria Lenz
  • Douglas Milan Tedesco
  • Paulo Henrique Camani
  • Derval dos Santos Rosa
Original Paper


Biocomposites with a corn starch-based biodegradable polymer as matrix and 10 wt% vegetable curauá fiber were processed by injection molding and were submitted to reprocessing up to ten cycles with or without 3 wt% of maleic anhydride grafted polypropylene as coupling agent. The effect of reprocessing on hardness, impact and tensile properties as well as on the morphology, thermal properties, chemical structure and soil degradation behaviour of the matrix and biocomposites was evaluated. Curauá fibers have increased hardness, impact and tensile strengths as well as increased tensile modulus and decreased elongation at break of the biocomposites with respect to starch-based matrix and these properties slightly decreased or no considerable changes were observed with the reprocessing cycle increase. The addition of coupling agent promoted an increase in all properties and they remained almost constant with the reprocessing cycle increase. Thus, the incorporation of curauá fiber within starch-based matrix can improve the mechanical properties of the biocomposites which showed potential to be recycled despite the weight loss in soil degradation tests reached around 10 wt% after 230 days for biocomposites reprocessed ten cycles.


Corn starch Curauá fiber Biocomposites Mechanical properties Recyclability 



The authors are grateful to National Counsel of Technological and Scientific Development (CNPq), Foundation for Research Support of the State of Rio Grande do Sul (Fapergs) and ULBRA Foundation (FULBRA) for financial support.


  1. 1.
    Gujar S, Pandel B, Jethoo AS (2014) Effect of plasticizer on mechanical and moisture absorption properties of eco-friendly corn starch-based bioplastic. Nat Environ Pollut Technol 13(2):425–428Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ahmed J, Tiwari BK, Imam SH, Rao MA (eds) (2012) Starch-based polymeric materials and nanocomposites: chemistry, processing and applications. Taylor & Francis Group, Boca Raton, p VBGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Pedroso AG, Rosa DS (2005) Mechanical, thermal and morphological characterization of recycled LDPE/corn starch blends. Carbohyd Polym 59(1):1–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Liu L, Yu Y, Song P (2013) Improved mechanical and thermal properties of polypropylene blends based on diethanolamine-plasticized corn starch via in situ reactive compatibilization. Ind Eng Chem Res 52:16232–16238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Vieyra H, Aguilar-Méndez MA, San Martín-Martínez E (2013) Study of biodegradation evolution during composting of polyethylene–starch blends using scanning electron microscopy. J Appl Polym Sci 127(2):845–853CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Peres AM, Pires RR, Oréfice RL (2016) Evaluation of the effect of reprocessing on the structure and properties of low density polyethylene/thermoplastic starch blends. Carbohyd Polym 136(20):210–215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ku H, Wang H, Pattarachaiyakoop N, Trada M (2011) A review on the tensile properties of natural fiber reinforced polymer composites. Compos B 42(4):856–873CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sain S, Sengupta S, Kar A, Mukhopadhyay A, Sengupta S, Kar T, Ray D (2014) Effect of modified cellulose fibers on the biodegradation behaviour of in-situ formed PMMA/cellulose composites in soil environment: Isolation and identification of the composite degrading fungus. Polym Degrad Stab 99:156–165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lee HV, Hamid BA, Zain SK (2014) Review article—conversion of lignocellulosic biomass to nanocellulose: structure and chemical process. Sci World J 2014:1–20. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ochi S (2006) Development of high strength biodegradable composites using Manila hemp fiber and starch-based biodegradable resin. Compos A 37:1879–1883CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Soroudi A, Jakubowicz I (2013) Recycling of bioplastics, their blends and biocomposites: a review. Eur Polymer J 49:2839–2858CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lopez JP, Girones J, Mendez JA, Puig J, Pelach MA (2012) Recycling ability of biodegradable matrices and their cellulose-reinforced composites in a plastic recycling stream. J Polym Environ 20:96–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Le Duigou A, Pillin I, Bourmaud A, Davies P, Baley C (2008) Effect of recycling on mechanical behaviour of biocompostable flax/poly(Llactide) composites. Compos A 39(9):1471–1478CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Drabek J, Zatloukal M (2016) Evaluation of thermally induced degradation of branched polypropylene by using rheology and different constitutive equations. Polymers 8(9):317–326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    La Mantia FP, Morreale M, Botta L, Mistretta MC, Ceraulo M, Scaffar R (2017) Degradation of polymer blends: a brief review. Polym Degrad Stab 145:79–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ramesh V, Mohanty S, Biswal M, Nayak SK (2015) Effect of reprocessing and accelerated weathering on impact-modified recycled blend. J Mater Eng Perform 24(12):5046–5053CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Soccalingame L, Bourmaud A, Perrin D, Bénézet J-C, Bergeret A (2015) Reprocessing of wood flour reinforced polypropylene composites: impact of particle size and coupling agent on composite and particle properties. Polym Degrad Stab 113:72–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Gardette M, Thérias S, Gardette J-L, Janecska T, Földes E, Pukánszky B (2013) Photo- and thermal oxidation of polyethylene: comparison of mechanisms and influence of unsaturation content. Polym Degrad Stab 98(11):2383–2390CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Pedroso AG, Rosa DS (2005) Effects of the compatibilizer PE-g-GMA on the mechanical, thermal and morphological properties of virgin and reprocessed LDPE/corn starch blends. Polym Adv Technol 16:310–317CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Peres AM, Pires RR, Oréfice RL (2016) Evaluation of the effect of reprocessing on the structure and properties of low density polyethylene/thermoplastic starch blends. Carbohyd Polym 136:210–215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Almeida MR, Alves RS, Nascimbem LB, Stephani R, Poppi RJ, de Oliveira LF (2010) Determination of amylose content in starch using Raman spectroscopy and multivariate calibration analysis. Anal Bioanal Chem 397(7):2693–2701CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Al-Mulla A, Alfadhel K, Qambar G, Shaban H (2013) Rheological study of recycled polypropylene–starch blends. Polym Bull 70:2599–2618CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Spinacé MAS, Lambert CS, Fermoselli KKG, De Paoli M-A (2009) Characterization of lignocellulosic curaua fibers. Carbohyd Polym 77:47–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Wang SJ, Yu JG, Yu JL (2005) Preparation and characterization of compatible thermoplastic starch/polyethylene blends. Polym Degrad Stab 87:395–401CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Soccalingame L, Perrin D, Benezet J-C, Mani S, Coiffier F, Richaud E, Bergeret (2015) A reprocessing of artificial UV-weathered wood flour reinforced polypropylene composites. Polym Degrad Stab 120:313–327CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Hanafi I, Zaaba NF (2012) The mechanical properties, water resistance and degradation behaviour of silica-filled sago starch/PVA plastic films. J Elastomers Plast 46(1):96–109Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Yaacob ND, Hanafi I, Ting SS (2016) Soil burial of polylactic acid/paddy straw powder biocomposite. Bioresources 11(1):1255–1269Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Programa de Pós-graduação em Engenharia de Materiais e Processos SustentáveisUniversidade Luterana do BrasilCanoasBrazil
  2. 2.Centro de Engenharia, Modelagem e Ciências Sociais Aplicadas (CECS)Universidade Federal do ABC (UFABC)Santo AndréBrazil

Personalised recommendations