JOURNAL OF

COMPOSITE
Article M AT E R I A L S
Journal of Composite Materials
0(0) 1–7
! The Author(s) 2018
Posidonia oceanica leaves for Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
processing of PMDI composite boards DOI: 10.1177/0021998318808024
journals.sagepub.com/home/jcm

Aldi Kuqo1 , Arjan Korpa2 and Nikolla Dhamo2

Abstract
Posidonia oceanica leaves (seagrass) are collected almost in all the Mediterranean seashores as spoils and disturbing
material with additional cost for removal from the coastline. Seagrass, however, is known for its interesting properties,
such as decay, fire and moisture resistance as well as insulation. Research for using this material in composing boards was
initiated. This study looks into the possibility of using these waste marine plants for the production of alternative building
material in the form of pressed panels. The paper describes the pretreatment of seagrass leaves before their processing
for composite boards and the examination of its final product. The residence time for salts desorption was also
determined. The main processes analyzed were the binder spraying and panel forming. Mechanical properties were
evaluated by the standardized flexural tests. In addition, swelling properties were investigated. Results obtained from
testing and observation of boards indicated that seagrass leaves are propitious for the application in construction and
furniture industry.

Keywords
Composite materials, flexural strength, particleboard, Posidonia oceanica, seagrass

Introduction (Camelia sinensis) and concluded that particleboards

Over the last decades, cellulosic waste products and
fibres have been widely used and there is an increasing
tendency for their application. Particle and fibreboards
are used in the building industry as thermal insulators
in facades and walls. Combined mechanical, thermal
and acoustic properties are found in them at a reason-
able cost. However, the wide use of cellulosic fibres
always makes it difficult to provide all users with a rea-
sonable price. In addition to the application of particle-
boards in construction as structural and non-structural
material, wood-based or other lignocellulosic materials
are beneficial for the furniture industry. Its develop-
ment, however, depends on easy access to timber in
which global resources are limited. Therefore, the
development of alternative raw materials is an increas-
ing necessity.
Low-cost raw materials, good swelling properties,
mechanical resistance and insulation are some of the
most important issues taken into consideration when
projecting the particleboards. Many scientists have
done research in this field, working with several alter-
native materials for the manufacture of particleboards.
Batiancela et al.1 have investigated the use of waste tea
from waste tea leaves have slightly lower bending
strength compared to wood particleboard, whereas
concerning that some of the physical properties, such
as moisture resistance and dimensional stability were
little higher. The suitability of renewable biomass has
been examined intensively over the last years. Rice
straw and peanut hulls were studied by Guler et al.,2
rice husk by Ota and Okamoto,3 tea leaves by and
Yalinkilic et al.,4 coffee waste by Rachtanapun et al.,5
pineapple leaves by Tangjuank.6 Seagrass, likewise, can
be considered as biomass for the preparation of parti-
cleboards. It is well known for its ecological import-
ance, because it protects beaches from erosion and
serves as an indicator of water quality. But the seagrass
1
Department of Industrial Chemistry, Faculty of Natural Sciences,
University of Tirana, Albania
2
Department of Chemistry, Faculty of Natural Sciences, University of
Tirana, Albania
Corresponding author:
Aldi Kuqo, Department of Industrial Chemistry, Faculty of Natural
Sciences, University of Tirana, Bulevardi Zogu I, Tirana 1001, Albania.
Email: aldi.kuqo@fshn.edu.al
2 Journal of Composite Materials 0(0)
collected on the coasts is a disturbing material for the
community especially in the tourist seasons and
its removal, transportation and landfilling cost a
lot of money.
Seagrass, also known as eelgrass, seaweed and algae,
is an aquatic flowering plant (of about 60 species) grow-
ing at the bottom of the sea. The entire area coverage of
this plant worldwide is estimated at 177,000 km2.7
Although they are very important habitats for many
microorganisms living in the sea, they are considered
as rubbish material, because after their growing season
many leaves break away, and carried by wave action,
settle on the seashores and decay. Their appearance
becomes an eyesore. According to Cebrian and
Duarte, and Cocozza et al.,8,9 a moderately wide belt
of Possidonia oceanica (PO) seagrass may deliver more
than 125 kg of dry material per square meter of
the coastline each year. That is a large amount of
waste material.
The PO (living plant), found mainly in the
Mediterranean Sea shores, covers approximately
40,000 km2 of the seabed.10 PO is a lignocellulosic
material which can be found in the form of seagrass
balls (Neptune Balls) and leaves. The first one has a
fibrous form and it comes from the rhizome of
Posidonia plant, while the second comes from its
living leaves. While seagrass has been investigated
mainly because it was considered a potential insulation
material for buildings, fibres of PO plant have been
used and investigated for various objectives. Ferrero
et al.11 and Puglia et al.12 have worked on green com-
posites using them as a reinforcing agent. PO leaves
have also been examined chemically and morphologic-
ally by Bettaieb et al.13,14 for the cellulose nanocrystals
generation. The researchers claim that PO waste prod-
ucts exhibit encouraging perspectives as nano-fillers for
polymer matrices. Besides their use as filling material in
the range of nanometres, there have been some efforts
to manufacture fibreboards from PO fibres. Garcia
et al.15 examined some of the most important physical
and mechanical properties of the PO fibreboard
concluding that they represent a great alternative to
the conventional natural fibreboards and they gave
special consideration to the interaction between the
lignocellulosic component and the binder. Although
there is an intense research on the PO fibres,
PO leaves have been less studied, even though their
amount located as waste material on the shore is
greater (wracks, dead leaves).
Research for the use of PO leaves in the manufacture
of particleboards has been carried out by Saval et al.16
who used an inorganic binder (cement), outlining the
possibility of their application in construction. In this
research, the fire resistance was additionally examined.
Results confirmed the results of previous authors who
studied other types of seagrass.17,18 Apart from flame
and mould resistance of seagrass, much work has been
done for the evaluation of thermal and acoustic con-
ductivity of their composite boards. A deep research
was undertaken by AITEX (Textile Industry Research
Association). In this research, the revalorization of
coastal algae wastes in Textile Nonwoven Industry
with application in building noise isolation was inves-
tigated. Results indicate very good acoustic insulation
properties.19
The purpose of this study is to highlight the inter-
esting properties of the raw material, to investigate the
final product and show that it can be competitive with
other lignocellulosic waste which can be used in con-
struction and finally to evaluate the most determinant
parameters for better mechanical and physical proper-
ties of the composite board.
Materials and methods
Materials
PO leaves were collected from the coastline of Albania
(Mediterranean coast) in April 2016. Their size varies
from 8 to 10 mm width and 50 to 150 mm length. The
leaves were dried in natural conditions (average relative
humidity 65%; average temperature: 25  C). In their
dried form, they have brown appearance (Figure 1).
Polymeric methylene diphenyl diisocyanate (PMDI-
PA360 Pure Wood Glue – provided by Akfix) was
used as a binder. An electrical spraying gun was used
for spraying the PO leaves and two metallic forms were
set up for the process of forming.
Preliminary treatment of PO leaves
PO leaves have different morphological features from
PO fibres. Sand particles and other soil contaminants
are deposited on their flat surface. Salt crystals, mainly
NaCl, which are hygroscopic compound, are deposited
on their surface. Soil contaminants and salts encumber
the uniform distribution of the binder, consequently
worsening the adhesion in this way. To remove those
‘‘contaminants,’’ PO leaves were preliminarily treated
with tap water. An amount of 500 g of PO leaves were
weighed and shoved into a 10 l glass vessel. The flow of
the tap water was kept at 5.7 l/h, which led to a resi-
dence time for the water of circa 105 min. The removal
of salts was attended using a conductivity meter and the
respective calibration curve for salt concentrations.
The process was stopped as soon as the conductivity
of the outlet water reached the values of the tap water
(298 lS). The leaves were there after letting them dry
naturally for 24 h. The moisture content of leaves in
room conditions was approximately 7%.
Kuqo et al.
PO leaves board formation
Five different composite boards have been prepared by
hand pressing machine, using various amounts of PO
leaves and binder. The seagrass mass was weighed and
partitioned. In due time, the binder (PMDI) was
weighed and diluted with acetone in order to reduce
its viscosity to the value range required for spraying
process. Regardless of different amounts of the binder
used in the first sample (35 g) and other samples (50 g),
the ratio of the binder and the solvent was constant,
and consequently the viscosity of the diluted binder was
also constant. Leaves were sprayed uniformly with
the diluted binder using an electrical spraying gun.
The metallic formworks used in the forming process,
were initially oiled in order to prevent sticking between
the form and the leaves. The sprayed leaves were left in
the open air for several minutes (4 min and 2 min), were
put in random direction in the metallic forms and then
were pressed with a hand pressing machine in room
temperature (approximately 25  ) for 24 h. The applied
pressure was constant for the first four samples,
whereas for the last one it was slightly increased.
Composite boards were then weighed. Due to the
low efficiency of spraying and the evaporation of the
solvent, the final mass of the board was lighter less than
the ‘‘theoretical’’ one. The content of binder in the
board Cb has been calculated taking into account the
loss in leaves and binder during forming:
mCb  ml ð1  l Þ
Cb ð%Þ ¼ 100 ð1Þ
mCb
where mCb – mass of the composite board, ml – initially
mass of the PO leaves and l – loss quotient (3% approx.).
Another important parameter was the spraying effi-
ciency sp which has been evaluated by the formula
mCb  ml ð1  l Þ
sp ð%Þ ¼ 100 ð2Þ
mb ð1  l Þ
Figure 1. PO leaves.
PO: Possidonia oceanica.
3
where mCb is the initial binder mass, mb is the mass of
the binder.
Density and mechanical properties determination
The density of the composite boards was determined
according to British Standard BS EN 323.20 Flexural
properties were determined using a laboratory testing
equipment (Instron Universal Testing Machine).
Samples were subjected to a three-point bending test.
Five different samples were tested, and the flexural
strength was calculated using the following formula
(BS EN 310)21
3fmax L
f ¼ ð3Þ
2bh2
where fmax stands for the maximal flexural force in N, L
is the distance in mm between the supports and b and h
are, respectively, the width and the height of the board
in mm.
Water absorption test
Thickness swelling (TS) and water absorption (WA)
were determined for the two board samples in accord-
ance with ASTM D 1037 Standard with minor modifi-
cations.22 Water absorption tests were conducted by
immersing the specimens from the boards in water
bath at 25 ºC, for three days. After the immersion pro-
cess, specimens were taken out of the water and the
surfaces were dried with a dry cloth. The amount of
water absorbed from each specimen was calculated by
the weight difference. The same procedure was con-
ducted for the determination of TS. Each specimen’s
thickness was measured before and after the immersion
process.
4 Journal of Composite Materials 0(0)

Results and discussion
Soil contaminants and salts encumber the uniform dis-
tribution of the binder, worsening the adhesion. In add-
ition, the sodium chloride crystals present in the leaf
surface have a negative effect on the thermal insulation
properties of the composite board, because they absorb
2
1.5
Concentraon 102 (mol/l)
moisture from the air. Niemz23 studied the influential
factors affecting the wood-based panel properties, high-
lighting the moisture content. Those particles and crys-
tals have been leached away with tap water, a process
that seems to be a first-order one with a half time of
2.05 h. Figure 2 shows the decrease of salts concentra-
tion with time. The process of salts leaching continued
for 8 h.
Composite boards made from PO leaves have a
wood-like appearance (Figure 3). This is interesting
for the applications of those boards in building and
furniture industry, without any other finishing. Due

to the uniform distribution of the binder in the seagrass

1 mass, spraying proved to be a more advantageous pro-
cess than a simple mixture. The process of pressing
resulted to be a determinant step for the mechanical
0.5 and physical performance of the composite board.
The results for the composite boards made of different
amounts of leaves and binder are summarized in
0
0 2 4 6 8 Table 1. The densities of composite boards vary from
Time (h) 308 kg/m3 to 480 kg/m3. Spraying efficiency and binder
content are also shown in the table. As it can be seen,
Figure 2. Salt removal: a first order process. the spraying efficiency achieved in laboratory

Figure 3. PO boards
PO: Possidonia oceanica.

Table 1. Summary of the results obtained for the composite boards made of different amounts of Possidonia oceanica leaves and
binder.

Retention time
Mass Mass of Mass of Binder from spraying Spraying Flexural
of PO the binder the board Binder content to pressing efficiency Density strength,
Nr. leaves (g) (g) (g) loss (g) (%) process (min) (%) (kg/m3) (N/mm2)

1 85 35 90 21.1 15.5 4 42.9 308 2.67

2 80 50 98 29 21.5 4 42.1 358 4.67
3 65 50 84 28.4 25.7 4 43.2 406 5.14
4 70 50 93 24.1 27.8 4 51.8 424 7.42
5 100 50 118 28.4 18.3 2 42.9 480 7.94
PO: Possidonia oceanica.
Kuqo et al. 5

Table 2. Physical properties and flexural strength of particleboards reported in the literature made from various agro-industrial
fibers and wood particles.

Density Flexural strength

Type of fiber References (kg/m3) (N/mm2) TS (%) WA (%)

Coffe husk Rachtanapun et al.5 830–870 48.8–76.1 20–30 19–28

Peanut hull Guler et al.2 500–800 2.5–12 12.5–26 70–95
Willow Warmbier and Wilczynski24 570 7.5–9.5 – –
Rubberwood Ahmade et al.25 550 5.5–8.5 – –
Saw dust Fono-Tamo et al.26 540 5.6 11.75 –
Cotton stalks Nazerian et al.27 213–580 3.8–14 45–70 118–164

100 15

80

Thickness swelling (%)

10
Water absorbon (%)

60

40 5

ρ = 424.2kg/m3
20 ρ = 424.2 kg/m3 ρ = 406.4 kg/m3
ρ = 406.4 kg/m3 0
0 20 40 60 80
0
Soaking me (hours)
0 20 40 60 80
Soaking me (hours) Figure 5. Thickness swelling against soaking time for two PO
board specimens.
Figure 4. Water absorption against soaking time for two PO
PO: Possidonia oceanica.
board specimens.
PO: Possidonia oceanica.

conditions was approximately 50% as well as the
binder loss. Naturally this process in industrial scale
could be more efficient.
Comparing with the densities of other wood
and non-wood cellulosic materials, the PO composite
boards are lighter products. Low density can be attrib-
uted to both, the relatively low pressing force in the
forming process and the high porosity of the PO
leaves. Table 2 illustrates physical properties such as
density, water absorption and flexural strength
(MOR-modulus of rupture) for a group of lightweight
particleboards. It is obvious that low density boards
have lower flexural resistance. Many authors have
been involved in the characterization of morphological
features of PO leaves and fibres and they concluded
that the internal structure of PO leaves is very
porous, containing mainly macropores (10–100 lm).13
Regarding the mechanical performance, Table 1
shows that flexural strength ranges from 2.67 to
7.94 N/mm2, which can be considered comparable
to the particleboards with similar densities. It can
be seen that the flexural resistance is affected mainly
by the density of the board which is a similar trend to
that observed for the conventional particleboards28,29
and the binder content. Whereas in the first four testing
pieces there is a correlation between the binder content
and flexural performance, the last testing piece has
lower binder content and the highest flexural resistance.
This deviation can be explained and is attributed to
different conditions in which the last PO board test
piece was prepared. The first parameter that was chan-
ged was the pressing force of hand pressing machine,
which was slightly increased. Compressibility of fibers
is very important because it contributes to the general
internal bond strength of the leaf board. The second
parameter was the dimidiated time interval of stay of
the PO sprayed mass between spraying and pressing
processes. It seems that the high compression and low
viscosity of binder solution few moments after spraying
had a positive effect improving contact and naturally
adhesion between leaves.
Regarding the swelling properties, it results that PO
leaf boards absorb less water (Figure 4), i.e. their swel-
ling thickness (Figure 5) indicates better moisture resist-
ance compared to other lignocellulosic-based boards.
We judge that low TS and WA are attributed to:
6 Journal of Composite Materials 0(0)
. The type of binder, which is known for its water
resistance. Previous studies observed that the use
of an isocyanate binder could result in superior
resistance to thickness swelling;30,31
. The great firmness to the water that seagrass has as
an aquatic plant;
. Flat shape of PO leaves can serve as a coating layer
for protecting the internal part of the board.
Differently from wood and other non-wood based
particleboards, PO leaf boards seem to have a unique
WA behavior. For the first period of soaking time, WA
values are much lower and it seems that absorption
(in %) increases constantly even after 72 h. Results indi-
cate that, for a short contact time with water, compos-
ite boards have an impressive resistance. It may be
assumed that the flat surface shape of the leaves pre-
vents water to enter the inner part of the board.
Differently from WA, TS reached a limit value for
both specimens. Plots presented in Figure 5 show that
the density plays a crucial role in the TS. Denser pieces
have lower TS. As a consequence of this, we can say
that the management of density could affect the mech-
anical properties of the composite boards as well as
their physical properties, such as moisture resistance.
The cutting and the inspection of the PO composite
board were carried out in accordance with BS EN
326-1.32 The examination of the inner part of the
board was done visually. Observation showed the for-
mation of layers of PO leaves which were placed over
each other, forming a stable structure.
Conclusion
PO leaves can be used as an alternative material for
the manufacture of leaf boards. Flexural strength
which varies from 2.7 to 7.9 N/mm2 is fairly propor-
tional with density. Addition of PMDI binder seems
to increase the flexural resistance of the board. Other
parameters that affect mechanical properties are press-
ing force and time of stay of PO sprayed mass in the
ambient between spraying and pressing processes.
Swelling test results indicate for an impressive mois-
ture resistance, caused mainly by the flat form of
leaves, which serves as a coat for the inner part of
the board. Since it is not preferable to dump seagrass
in the landfill, it could be beneficial to use this bio-
mass in construction. This work has investigated only
some of the properties and much work has to be done
in order to create a clearer picture of the product.
Further experimental investigations are recommended
towards the binder compatibility, pressing process and
spraying efficiency.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with
respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this
article.
Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research,
authorship, and/or publication of this article.
ORCID iD
Aldi Kuqo http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2698-1682
References
1. Batiancela MA, Acda MN and Cabangon RJ.
Particleboard from waste tea leaves and wood particles.
J Compos Mater 2015; 48: 1–6.
2. Guler C, Copur Y and Tascioglu C. The manufacture of
particleboards using mixture of peanut hull (Arachis
Hypoqaea L.) the European Black Pine (Pinusnigra
Arnold) wood chips. Biores Technol 2007; 99: 2893–2897.
3. Ota T and Okamoto T. Mechanical properties of particle-
board made from rice. J Mater Sci Eng 2015; 5: 263–269.
4. Yalinkilic MK, Imamura Y, Takahashi M, et al.
Biological, physical and mechanical properties of parti-
cleboard manufacture from waste tea leaves. Int Biodeter
Biodegr 1998; 41: 75–84.
5. Rachtanapun P, Sattayarak T and Ketsamak N.
Correlation of density and properties of particleboard
from coffee waste with urea–formaldehyde and polymeric
methylene diphenyl diisocyanates. J Compos Mater 2012;
46: 1–12.
6. Tangjuank S. Thermal insulation and physical properties
of particleboards from pineapple leaves. Int J Phys Sci
2011; 6: 4528–4532.
7. Green E and Short F. World atlas of seagrasses. Berkeley:
University of California Press, 2003, p.40.
8. Cebrian J and Duarte CM. Detrital stocks and dynamics
of the seagrass Posidonia oceanica (L.) Delile in the
Spanish Mediterranean. Aquat Bot 2001; 70: 295–309.
9. Cocozza C, Parente A, Zaccone C, et al. Chemical, phys-
ical characterization of Posidonia oceanic (L.) Del. resi-
due and their possible recycle. Biomass Bioenergy 2011;
35: 799–807.
10. Duarte CM. How can beaches be managed with respect
to seagrass litter? In: Borum J, Duarte CM, Krause-
Jensen D, et al. (eds) European seagrasses: an introduction
to monitoring and management Copenhagen: EU project
Monitoring and Management of European Seagrass
Beds, 2004, pp.83–87.
11. Ferrero B, Boronat T, Moriana F, et al. Green compos-
ites based on wheat gluten matrix and Posidonia oceanica
waste fibers as reinforcements. Polym Compos 2013; 34:
1663–1669.
12. Puglia D, Petruci R, Luzi F, et al. Revalorisation of
Posidonia oceanica as reinforcement in polyethylene/
maleic anhydride grafted polyethylene composites.
J Renew Mater 2014; 2: 66–76.
Kuqo et al.
13. Bettaieb F, Khiari R, Dufrence A, et al. Nanofibrillar
cellulose from Posidonia oceanica: properties
and morphological features. Ind Crops Prod 2015; 72:
97–106.
14. Bettaieb F, Khiari R, Hassan M, et al. Preparation and
characterization of new cellulose nanocrystals from
marine biomass Posidonia oceanica. Ind Crops Prod
2014; 72: 175–182.
15. Garcia DG, Carrillo LQ, Montanes N, et al.
Manufacturing and characterization of composite fibre-
boards with Posidonia oceanic wastes with an environ-
mentally-friendly binder from epoxy resin. Materials
2017; 11: 35.
16. Saval JM, Lapuente R, Navarro V, et al. Fire-resistance,
physical, and mechanical characterization of particle-
board containing Oceanic Posidonia waste. Mater
Construc 2014; 64: e019.
17. Pedersen C and Ransby E. Production and properties of
insulation mats made from sea grass. In: 3rd IASME/
WSEAS international conference on energy, environment,
ecosystems and sustainable development (EEESD ’07),
Agios Nikolaos, Greece, 24–26 July 2007, WSEAS
press, pp.626–631.
18. Yang J. Properties analysis of seaweed as a trad-
itional building material. Adv Mater Res 2012; 450-451:
154–157.
19. AITEX. Revalorization of Coastal Algae Wastes in Textile
Nonwoven Industry with Applications in Building Noise
Isolation. Final Report: Life þ Sea Matter. 30 May 2015.
20. BS EN 323:1993. Wood-based panels – determination of
density. British Standards.
21. BS EN 310:1993. Wood-based panels – determination of
flexural strength. British Standards.
22. American Society for Testing Materials. Standard D
1037: standard test methods of evaluating properties of
wood-base fiber and particle panel materials.
23. Niemzt P. Wood based panels. An introduction for special-
ists. Chapter 2: water absorption of wood and wood-based
7
panels – significant influencing factors. London, England:
Brunel University Press, 2010, pp.95–122.
24. Warmbier K and Wilczynski M. Resincontent and board
density dependent Mechanical properties of one layer
particleboard made from willow (Salix viminalis). Drvna
Ind 2016; 67: 127–131.
25. Ahmade BAZ, Ahmad M and Abu F. The mechanical
properties of rubberwood particleboards bonded with
different resin type at different loaded density. Int J Sci
Eng Technol 2016; 4: 119–121.
26. Fono-Tamo RS, Idowu OO and Koya FO. Development
of pulverized palm kernel shells based particleboard. Int J
Mater Mech Eng 2014; 3: 54–61.
27. Nazerian M, Beyki Z, Gargarii BM, et al. The effect of
some technological production variables on mechanical
and physical properties of particleboard manufactured
from cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) stalks. Maderas
Cienc Tecnol 2016; 18: 167–178.
28. Widyorini R, Xu J, Umemura K, et al. Manufacture and
properties of binderless particleboard from bagasse I:
effects of raw material type, storage methods, and man-
ufacturing process. J Wood Sci 2005; 51: 648–654.
29. Xu J, Sugawara R, Widyorini R, et al. Manufacture and
properties of low-density binderless particleboard from
kenaf core. J Wood Sci 2004; 50: 62–67.
30. Chelak W and Newman WH. MDI high moisture content
bonding mechanism, parameters, and benefits using MDI
in composite wood products. In: Proceedings of 25th
international particleboard/composite materials sympo-
sium, Pullman, WA, 9–11 April 1991. Washington,
USA: Agricultural Science and Technology (AGRIS),
Washington State University. pp.205–229.
31. Hawke R, Sun B and Gale M. Effect of fiber mat mois-
ture content on physical properties of polyisocyanate-
bonded hardboard. Forest Prod J 1993; 43: 15–20.
32. BS EN 326-1:1994. Wood-based panels – sampling, cut-
ting and inspection – part 1: sampling and cutting of test
pieces and expression of test results. British Standards.