Lignocellulosic Polymer Composites: Processing, Challenges, and Opportunities

  • Ujendra Kumar KomalEmail author
  • Hitesh Sharma
  • Inderdeep Singh
Part of the Materials Horizons: From Nature to Nanomaterials book series (MHFNN)


The use of lignocellulosic fibers such as pineapple, banana, jute, and sisal as a reinforcement for developing the biocomposites is an emerging area of research in the field of polymer-based composites. Biocomposites have replaced the traditional fiber-reinforced polymer composites in various non-structural applications. The number of processes has been developed and commercialized for near-net-shape manufacturing of biocomposite components. However, complex composite products necessitate the secondary operations such as hole-making as an essential step for ascertaining the assembly operations. The hole-making operations lead to the damage in the biocomposite components in the form of delamination and fiber pullout. The researchers and engineers worldwide have tried to investigate the various issues, challenges, and opportunities in the primary and secondary processing of biocomposites. The current chapter highlights the fundamental issues, the challenges, and the existing opportunities which can help in formulating a road map for research and development in the field of primary and secondary processing of biocomposites.


Biocomposites Primary processing Secondary processing Delamination 


  1. 1.
    Holbery J, Houston D (2006) Natural-fibre-reinforced polymer composites in automotive applications. J Miner Met Mater Soc 58:80–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sreenivasan S, Sulaiman S, Ariffin MKAM, Baharudin BTHT, Abdan K (2018) Physical properties of novel kenaf short fiber reinforced bulk molding compounds (bmc) for compression moulding. Mater Today Proc 5:1226–1232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Najafi A, Kord B, Abdi A, Ranaee S (2012) The impact of the nature of nanoclay on physical and mechanical properties of polypropylene/reed flour nanocomposites. J Thermoplast Compos Mater 25:717–727CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Väisänen T, Das O, Tomppo L (2017) A review on new bio-based constituents for natural fiber-polymer composites. J Clean Prod 149:582–596CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Joshi SV, Drzal LT, Mohanty AK, Arora S (2004) Are natural fiber composites environmentally superior to glass fiber reinforced composites? Compos Part A Appl Sci Manuf 35:371–376CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chaitanya S, Singh I (2017) Sisal fiber-reinforced green composites: effect of ecofriendly fiber treatment. Polym Compos 16:101–113Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Huda MS, Drzal LT, Mohanty AK, Misra M (2008) Effect of fiber surface-treatments on the properties of laminated biocomposites from poly(lactic acid) (PLA) and kenaf fibers. Compos Sci Technol 68:424–432CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Joseph P (1999) Effect of processing variables on the mechanical properties of sisal-fiber-reinforced polypropylene composites. Compos Sci Technol 59:1625–1640CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wu Y, Xia C, Cai L, Garcia AC, Shi SQ (2018) Development of natural fiber-reinforced composite with comparable mechanical properties and reduced energy consumption and environmental impacts for replacing automotive glass-fiber sheet molding compound. J Clean Prod 184:92–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Oksman K, Skrifvars M, Selin JF (2003) Natural fibres as reinforcement in polylactic acid (PLA) composites. Compos Sci Technol 63:1317–1324CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ochi S (2008) Mechanical properties of kenaf fibers and kenaf/PLA composites. Mech Mater 40:446–452CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Shih YF, Huang CC, Chen PW (2010) Biodegradable green composites reinforced by the fiber recycling from disposable chopsticks. Mater Sci Eng A 527:1516–1521CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kamath M, Bhat G (2005) Cotton fiber nonwovens for automotive composites. Int Nonwovens J 14:34–40Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Debnath K, Singh I, Dvivedi A (2017) On the analysis of force during secondary processing of natural fiber-reinforced composite laminates. Polym Compos 38:164–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Debnath K, Singh I, Dvivedi A (2014) Drilling characteristics of sisal fiber-reinforced epoxy and polypropylene composites. Mater Manuf Process 29:1401–1409CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Yallew TB, Kumar P, Singh I (2016) A study about hole making in woven jute fabric-reinforced polymer composites. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part L J Mater Des Appl 230:888–898Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Bajpai PK, Singh I (2013) Drilling behavior of sisal fiber-reinforced polypropylene composite laminates. J Reinf Plast Compos 32:1569–1576CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wang X, Wang LJ, Tao JP (2004) Investigation on thrust in vibration drilling of fiber-reinforced plastics. J Mater Process Technol 148:239–244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Debnath K (2015) Machining behavior of fiber-reinforced polymer composites. Ph.D. thesis, Indian Institute of Technology RoorkeeGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Zackrisson L, Eriksson I, Backlund J (1994) Method and tool for machining a hole in a fiber-reinforced composite material. Swedish patent no. 500933Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Thomas PNH, Babitsky VI (2007) Experiments and simulations on ultrasonically assisted drilling. J Sound Vib 308:815–830CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ujendra Kumar Komal
    • 1
    Email author
  • Hitesh Sharma
    • 2
  • Inderdeep Singh
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Mechanical and Industrial EngineeringIndian Institute of Technology RoorkeeRoorkeeIndia
  2. 2.Department of Mechanical EngineeringNational Institute of Technology UttarakhandSrinagar (Garhwal)India

Personalised recommendations