A comparative study of energy consumption and physical properties of microfibrillated cellulose produced by different processing methods

By K. Spence, R. Venditti, Orlando J. Rojas, Youssef Habibi, J. Pawlak. 2011

500 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Biomaterials, Biomedical Engineering

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/bbafb35132aed23c8d6b33cfd4df949c9f36897e

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Biomaterials

1. A. Dufresne
2. Kristiina Oksman
3. Aji P. Mathew
4. W. Hamad
5. Chuanwei Miao
6. Tanja Zimmermann
7. Mehdi Jonoobi
8. P. Tingaut

In Biomedical Engineering

1. A. Dufresne
2. Kristiina Oksman
3. M. John
4. T. Mokhena
5. P. Engstrand
6. S. Norgren
7. S. H. Osong
8. W. Hamad

Citations in the corpus

• Production and modification of nanofibrillated cellulose using various mechanical processes: a review. (2014, methodology): “…al. (2011) and Besbes, Rei Vilar, et al. (2011) 2011 Comparison of energy utilization in micro grinding, homogenization and microfluidization methods Spence et al. (2011) 2012 NFC isolation by microfluidizer and its application in nanopaper Ferrer et al. (2012) 2012 Acetylated NFC as a toughening…”
• A review on nanocellulosic fibres as new material for sustainable packaging: Process and applications (2016, unknown): “[64,66,67] Uniformity in reduction of sample size.”
• Different preparation methods and properties of nanostructured cellulose from various natural resources and residues: a review (2015, background): “Based on the investigation of Spence et al. (2011) comparing three mechanical processes to prepare CNF, microfluidization and grinding were reported to need less energy compared to homogenization, and higher film toughness could be obtained by grinding and microfluidization.”
• Enhancing adsorption of heavy metal ions onto biobased nanofibers from waste pulp residues for application in wastewater treatment (2014, background): “Pulp residue is an attractive raw material since it is an inexpensive waste product from pulp and paper industry that could be exploited for the elaboration of new materials (Jonoobi et al. 2012; Spence et al. 2011).”
• Cellulose reinforced polymer composites and nanocomposites: a critical review (2013, methodology): “In such composites, however, MFC was the major composition, and the best performing sample contained 95 wt% MFC.”
• Processing of wood-based microfibrillated cellulose and nanofibrillated cellulose, and applications relating to papermaking: a review (2016, methodology): “Mechanical treatment has been the primary disintegration technique used to produce MFC and NFC.”
• Cellulose nanomaterials: new generation materials for solving global issues (2019, background): “…(2008) Wheat straw 43 35 22 – – – Alemdar and Sain (2008) Maize stalk 44.6–54.1 16.9–23.8 26.9–30.3 – – 0.66 Ferreira et al. (2018) Corncob residue 63.5 25.8 2.7 – – 2.1 Carrots 81 2.5 9 7.5 – – Siqueira et al. (2016) Sisal 78 8 10 – 2 1 Hardwood 43–47 25–35 – – – – Spence et al.…”