Cellulose (2020) 27:7215–7225
7223
Table 4 Comparison of the improved strength properties of paper products published in recently
Publication
Reinforced fiber
Added amount (%)
Retention agent/filler
Increase of tensile strength (%)
Increase of z-direction tensile strength (%)
Final product
Eriksen et al. (2008)
Kraft pulp CMF
1–8
No/no
7–21 Not analyzed TMP
Hii et al. (2012)
SW kraft pulp CMF
2.5–5 Yes/yes
3–13 20–35
Newsprint grade TMP
Djafari Petroudy et al. (2014)
Mechanical and enzymatic treated CMF
1–5
Yes/no
22–40 Not analyzed Bagasse pulp
Hellstro¨m et al. (2014) Fenton and enzymatic treated CNF
5
Yes/yes
5–35 2–50
CTMP
Su et al. (2014)
HW kraft pulp CMF
10
Yes/no
270–300 Not analyzed HW kraft pulp
Delgado-Aguilar et al. (2015a)
Tempo-oxidized CNF
1.5–4.5 Yes/yes
40–82 32–56
Deinked pulp
Hassan et al. (2015)
Enzymatic and TEMPO- oxidized CNF
2.5–20 No/no
14–62 Not analyzed Softwood and bagasse pulps
Delgado-Aguilar et al. (2015b) Brodin and Eriksen (2015)
HW kraft pulp CNF
3
Yes/no
70–200 Not analyzed HW kraft pulp
Carboxymethylated and fractionated TMP
0–20 No/no
1–15 Not analyzed TMP
Mashkour et al. (2015) Acetylated CNF
0–10 Yes/no
0–17 Not analyzed SW kraft pulp
Hietala et al. (2016)
Dicarboxyl acid cellulose CNF 0.25–4 Yes/yes
0–21 Not analyzed Fluting board
Suopaja¨rvi et al. (2017)
Kraft pulp, Fluting and Board CNF
4
Yes/yes
12–34 Not analyzed Kraft pulp, Fluting and Board
Tajik et al. (2018)
Bagasse pulp CNF
0.1–2 Yes/no
15–49 Not analyzed Bagasse pulp
Bossu et al. (2019)
SW kraft pulp CMF
1–10 No/no
3–48 1–95
SW kraft pulp
This study
Boxboard CNF
2–6
No/no
1–45 2–85
Recycled boxboard
This study
DES-treated boxboard CNF 2–6
No/no
11–60 20–72
Recycled boxboard
S6). Obviously, the board strength properties can still be improved by adding CNF with a higher grinding level ( [ 4 kWh/kg) or by increasing the amount of reinforced CNF ( [ 4 wt%), but this is not meaningful from an economic point of view. Furthermore, higher dosages of CNF from higher grinding levels would increase the drainage time and cause problems in the actual board manufacturing process. Moreover, it must be highlighted that the total chemical costs needed for the DES-pretreatment and the recycling of chemicals (i.e., urea and choline chloride) increased relative much (around 30%) of the final product price when DES-treatment is used in the CNF preparation. In summary, the results suggest that the grammage of prepared board could be decreased by adding CNF as the reinforcement material, and the treated product would still achieve similar strength properties as the original board without any reinforced fibers.
In the Table 4 have been compared improved strength properties of different paper products pub- lished in recent years. As can be noticed different nanocellulose reinforced fibers have typically a pos- itive impact on the strength properties of various paper products, but some of research’s were used very expensive chemicals and very energy intensive grind- ing method like high pressure homogenization instead of mechanical grinding. Additionally, most of studies focused on paper strengthening and only a few scientific studies have focused on the effects of CNF on paperboard properties.
Conclusions
This study’s findings showed that, by selecting suitable grinding levels and dosages of CNF, it is
123
Made with FlippingBook - Online catalogs