Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T14:21:49.976Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Quantitative Electron Microscopy of Cellulose Nanofibril Structures from Eucalyptus and Pinus radiata Kraft Pulp Fibers

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 July 2011

Gary Chinga-Carrasco ,
Yingda Yu  and
Ola Diserud
Gary Chinga-Carrasco*
Affiliation:
Paper and Fiber Research Institute (PFI AS), Høgskoleringen 6b, NO-7491 Trondheim, Norway
Yingda Yu
Affiliation:
Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), NO-7491 Trondheim, Norway
Ola Diserud
Affiliation:
Norwegian Institute for Nature Research (NINA), NO-7485 Trondheim, Norway
*
Corresponding author. E-mail: gary.chinga.carrasco@pfi.no
Get access

Abstract

This work comprises the structural characterization of Eucalyptus and Pinus radiata pulp fibers and their corresponding fibrillated materials, based on quantitative electron microscopy techniques. Compared to hardwood fibers, the softwood fibers have a relatively open structure of the fiber wall outer layers. The fibrillation of the fibers was performed mechanically and chemi-mechanically. In the chemi-mechanical process, the pulp fibers were subjected to a TEMPO-mediated oxidation to facilitate the homogenization. Films were made of the fibrillated materials to evaluate some structural properties. The thicknesses and roughnesses of the films were evaluated with standardized methods and with scanning electron microscopy (SEM), in backscattered electron imaging mode. Field-emission SEM (FE-SEM) and transmission electron microscopy (TEM) were performed to quantify the nanofibril morphology. In this study, we give additional and significant evidences about the suitability of electron microscopy techniques for quantification of nanofibril structures. In addition, we conclude that standard methods are not suitable for estimating the thickness of films having relatively rough surfaces. The results revealed significant differences with respect to the morphology of the fibrillated material. The differences are due to the starting raw material and to the procedure applied for the fibrillation.

Keywords

microfibrillated cellulose (MFC)computerized image analysismicroscopymetrologynanotechnology
Type
Biological Applications
Information
Microscopy and Microanalysis , Volume 17 , Issue 4 , August 2011 , pp. 563 - 571
Copyright
Copyright © Microscopy Society of America 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Abe, K., Iwamoto, S. & Yano, H. (2007). Obtaining cellulose nanofibers with a uniform width of 15 nm from wood. Biomacromolecules 8, 3276–3278.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ahola, S., Salmi, J., Johansson, L.-S., Laine, J. & Österberg, M. (2008). Model films from native cellulose nanofibrils. Preparation, swelling, and surface interactions. Biomacromolecules 9, 1273–1282.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chinga, G., Johnsen, P.O., Dougherty, R., Lunden-Berli, E. & Walter, J. (2007a). Quantification of the 3D microstructure of SC surfaces. J Microsc 227(3), 254–265.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chinga, G., Solheim, O. & Mörseburg, K. (2007b). Cross-sectional dimensions of fiber and pore networks based on Euclidean distance maps. Nordic Pulp Paper Res J 22(4), 500–507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chinga-Carrasco, G., Johnsen, P.O. & Øyaas, K. (2010). Structural quantification of wood fibre surfaces—Morphological effects of pulping and enzymatic treatment. Micron 41(6), 648–659.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chinga-Carrasco, G. & Syverud, K. (2010). Computer-assisted quantification of the multi-scale structure of films made of nanofibrillated cellulose. J Nanoparticle Res 12(3), 841–851.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Egerton, R.F., Li, P. & Malac, M. (2004). Radiation damage in the TEM and SEM. Micron 35(6), 399–409.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Eriksen, Ø., Syverud, K. & Gregersen, Ø. (2008). The use of microfibrillated cellulose produced from kraft pulp as a strength enhancer in TMP paper. Nord Pulp Paper Res J 23(3), 299–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frey-Wyssling, A. (1954). The fine structure of cellulose microfibrils. Science 119, 80–82.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fukuzumi, H., Saito, T., Iwata, T., Kumamoto, Y. & Isogai, A. (2009). Transparent and high gas barrier films of cellulose nanofibers prepared by TEMPO-mediated oxidation. Biomacromolecules 10, 162–165.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Herrick, F.W., Casebier, R.L., Hamilton, J.K. & Sandberg, K.R. (1983). Microfibrillated cellulose: Morphology and accessibility. J Appl Polym Sci, Appl Polym Symp 37, 797–813.Google Scholar
Heyn, A.N. (1969). The elementary fibril and supermolecular structure of cellulose in soft wood fiber. J Ultrastructure Res 26, 52–68.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Larsen, R.J. & Marx, M.L. (2006). An Introduction to Mathematical Statistics and Its Applications, 4th Ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Prentice-Hall Press.Google Scholar
Meier, H. (1962). Chemical and morphological aspects of the fine structure of wood. Pure Appl Chem 5, 37–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pääkkö, M., Ankefors, M., Kosonen, H., Nykänen, A., Ahola, S., Österberg, M., Ruokolainen, J., Laine, J., Larsson, P.T., Ikkala, O. & Lindström, T. (2007). Enzymatic hydrolysis combined with mechanical shearing and high-pressure homogenization for nanoscale cellulose fibrils and strong gels. Biomacromolecules 8, 1934–1941.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
R Development Core Team (2009). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. ISBN 3-900051-07-0; URL http://www.R-project.org.Google Scholar
Reme, P.A., Johnsen, P.O. & Helle, T. (2002). Assessment of fibre transverse dimensions using SEM and image analysis. J Pulp Pap Sci 28(4), 122–128.Google Scholar
Saito, T., Nishiyama, Y., Putaux, J.L., Vignon, M. & Isogai, A. (2006). Homogeneous suspensions of individualized microfibrils from TEMPO-catalyzed oxidation of native cellulose. Biomacromolecules 7(6), 1687–1691.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Seydibeyoglu, M.Ö. & Oksman, K. (2008). Novel nanocomposites based on polyurethane and micro fibrillated cellulose. Comp Techn 68, 908–914.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stelte, W. & Sanadi, A.R. (2009). Preparation and characterization of cellulose nanofibers from two commercial hardwood and softwood pulps. Ind Eng Chem Res 48, 11211–11219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Syverud, K., Chinga-Carrasco, G., Toledo, J. & Toledo, P.G. (2011). A comparative study of Eucalyptus and Pinus radiata pulp fibres as raw materials for production of cellulose nanofibrils. Carbohyd Polym 84(3), 1033–1038.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Syverud, K. & Stenius, P. (2009). Strength and barrier properties of MFC films. Cellulose 16(1), 75–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tanigushi, T. & Okamura, K. (1998). New films produced from microfibrillated natural fibres. Polym Int 47, 291–294.3.0.CO;2-1>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Turbak, A.F., Snyder, F.W. & Sandberg, K.R. (1983). Microfibrillated cellulose, a new cellulose product: Properties, uses, and commercial potential. J Appl Polym Sci Appl Polym Symp 37, 815–827.Google Scholar
Ziabari, M., Mottaghitalab, V., Scott, T., McGovern, A.K. & Haghi, A. (2007). A new image analysis based method for measuring electrospun nanofiber diameter. Nanoscale Res Lett 2, 597–600.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zimmermann, T., Bordeanu, N. & Strub, E. (2010). Properties of nanofibrillated cellulose from different raw materials and its reinforcement potential. Carbohyd Polym 79(4), 1086–1093.CrossRefGoogle Scholar