Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Materials Today: Proceedings

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/matpr

An overview on natural cellulose fiber reinforced polymer composites

S. Venkatarajan a, A. Athijayamani b,⇑
a
Department of Physics, A.C.G.C.E.T, Karaikudi 630003, Tamilnadu, India
b
Department of Mechanical Engineering, GCE, Bodi 625582, Tamilnadu, India

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: For last few decades, a momentous amount of interest has been exposed on the possible usages of natural
Received 21 May 2020 cellulose fibers to replace synthetic fibers like glass, aramid and carbon, in polymer matrix composites.
Received in revised form 22 September Even though natural fibers are not as strong as synthetic fibers, these are abundantly available, low den-
2020
sity, low cost, renewable, and biodegradable. Due to the high price of composites reinforced with syn-
Accepted 28 September 2020
Available online xxxx
thetic fibers and environmental concerns, the manufacturing industries demand better materials with
high strength-to-weight ratio for production of parts and components at the same time with an improve-
ment in quality. With the help of proper review on the performance of natural cellulose fiber reinforced
Keywords:
Natural cellulose fibers
polymer composites, engineers and researchers involved on the development of environmentally friendly
Polymer matrices materials can develop new materials satisfying ecological requirements with improved property levels.
Composites This paper was presented with the aim of developing a new natural cellulose fiber reinforced polymer
Mechanical properties composites having better performance. Natural fiber reinforced polymer composites have reviewed with
Fiber content respect of types of fibers and polymer matrices, their properties and applications.
Ó 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the International Confer-
ence on Newer Trends and Innovation in Mechanical Engineering: Materials Science.

1. Introduction during processing due to poor thermal stability. The resistance to

For last few decades, it has been an increasing ecological con-
sciousness, which increased the interest of materials researchers
on usage of the natural bio fibers derived from the renewable
resources instead of conventional fibers (glass, carbon and aramid)
in polymer matrix composites. Extensive studies carried out on the
natural fibers such as banana, sisal, coir, jute, hemp, kenaf, sugar-
cane bagasse, rice husk, pineapple leaf, Roselle and ramie show
that they have the potential as effectual reinforcing agents for
polymer matrix composites [1-12]. Even though natural fibers
derived from renewable resources have a number of environmen-
tal related advantages over synthetic fibers they also have a num-
ber of disadvantages, such as higher moisture absorption, poor
thermal stability as well as lower impact strength [13]. The higher
moisture absorption tendency of natural fibers changes the com-
posite specimen dimensionally, which leading to micro-cracking
within the composite specimens. The moisture absorption has sev-
eral adverse effects on the properties and long-term performance
of composites [14,15]. Moreover, composite specimens degrade
⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: athimania@gmail.com (A. Athijayamani).
the moisture or water absorption can be increased by using a suit-
able surface modification which can enhance the mechanical prop-
erties of natural fibers [16-21].
Natural cellulose fibers can be derived from various bio
resources such as animal, birds, vegetable or mineral. The cellulose
based natural fibers are obtained from various parts of the vegeta-
bles and plants. Natural cellulose fibers can be classified as shown
in Fig. 1. The chemical composition, locality in which it is grown,
the age of the plant, and the extraction methods are decides the
physical and mechanical properties of natural cellulose fibers
[22,23]. The typical chemical composition of several natural cellu-
lose fibers is given in Table 1. Table 2 shows the mechanical prop-
erties of some natural cellulose fibers.
Natural fiber reinforced polymer composites have received
much attention based on different applications because of the good
properties and the advantages found over synthetic fiber rein-
forced polymer composites. Natural fibers have several advantages
like low cost and density, renewability, abundantly available, less
pollution during production, minimal health hazards and eco-
friendly nature. However, they have some disadvantages such as
high moisture absorption tendency and low impact strength, etc.
Natural fiber reinforced polymer composites have been used in

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2020.09.773
2214-7853/Ó 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the International Conference on Newer Trends and Innovation in Mechanical Engineering:
Materials Science.

Please cite this article as: S. Venkatarajan and A. Athijayamani, An overview on natural cellulose fiber reinforced polymer composites, Materials Today:
Proceedings, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2020.09.773
S. Venkatarajan and A. Athijayamani Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx

Fig. 1. Classification of natural cellulose fibers.

Table 1
Chemical composition of several natural fibers [24].

Fibers Cellulose (wt%) Hemicellulose (wt%) Lignin (wt%) Pectin (wt%) Waxes (wt%) Moisture content (wt%)
Jute 60.9–72.1 14.2–20.3 12–13 0.2 0.5 12.7–13.6
Flax 71 18.6–20.6 2.2 2.3 1.7 8–12
Hemp 70–74 17.9–22.4 3.7–5.7 0.9 0.8 6.2–12
Sisal 66–78 10–14 10–14 10 2 10–22
Kenaf 45–57 21.5 8–13 3–5 – –
Ramie 68.6–76.2 13.1–16.7 0.6–0.7 1.9 0.3 7.5–17
Banana 63–64 10 5 – 10–12
Pineapple leaf 70–82 5–12.7 – 11.8
Coir 32–43 0.15–0.25 40–45 3–4 8
Cotton 85–90 5.7 0–1 0.6 7.85–8.5

many industries such as automobile, aerospace, marine, electronic,
packaging, and construction.
2. Natural fiber-reinforced polymer composites
Recently the polymer composites (thermosetting and thermo-
plastic) reinforced with natural cellulose fibers have received con-
siderable attention among material researchers and scientists
around the world for their eco-friendliness and good physical
and mechanical properties [26-28]. Natural cellulose fibers are rec-
ognized as a potential alternative to synthetic fibers in polymer
matrix composites due to their attractive advantages such as avail-
ability, renewability, low density, and low cost as well as satisfac-
tory mechanical properties. Mechanical properties of natural fiber
reinforced polymer composites are influenced by several factors
such as fiber and matrix nature, fiber geometries, fiber orientation,
and fiber–matrix interfacing adhesion, etc [29-33].
Sèbe et al. [34] investigated the flexural and impact properties
of hemp fiber-reinforced polyester composites prepared using a
resin transfer molding technique. It was observed that the flexural
stress at break and flexural modulus showed an increasing trend
with fiber content. Impact strength was found to decrease at low
fiber content, and then gradually increase with further addition
of fiber contents. Generally, natural fiber polymer composites are

2
S. Venkatarajan and A. Athijayamani Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx

Table 2
The mechanical properties of some natural cellulose fibers [25].

Fibers Density (g/cm3) Elongation at break (%) Tensile strength (MPa) Young’s modulus (GPa)
Jute 1.3 1.5–1.8 393–773 26.5
Kneaf – – 295 22
Flax 1.5 2.7–3.2 345–1035 27.6
Sisal 1.5 2.0–2.5 511–635 9.4–22.0
Hemp – 1.6 690 –
Ramie – 3.6–3.8 400–938 61.4–128
Coir 1.2 30.0 175 4.0–6.0
Bamboo 1.5 3 575 27
Banana 1.3 7 500 1.4
Bagasse 1.25 – 290 17
Cotton 1.5–1.6 7.0–8.0 287–597 5.5–12.6

Fig. 2. Variations in the (a) flexural strength and (b) flexural modulus of untreated and treated short hemp fiber reinforced polylactide composites as a function of fiber
content [Sawpan et al.].

Fig. 3. Variations in the (a) flexural strength and (b) flexural modulus of untreated and treated short hemp fiber reinforced unsaturated polyester composites as a function of
fiber content [Sawpan et al.].

3
S. Venkatarajan and A. Athijayamani
prepared by various manufacturing techniques: compression
moulding, injection moulding, vacuum moulding, and resin trans-
fer moulding, etc. Yousif et al. [35] investigated the flexural prop-
erties of unidirectional long kenaf fiber reinforced epoxy
composites prepared into two types as untreated and treated (with
6% NaOH). The scanning electron microscope was used to catego-
rize the failure mechanism and damage features of the composite
materials. The authors found that reinforcement of treated kenaf
fibers with epoxy increased the flexural strength of the composite
by about 36%, while, untreated fibers introduced 20% improve-
ment. From the fracture study, it was observed that for untreated
composites, the fracture mechanisms were de-bonding, tearing,
detachments and pull out of fibers. Rout et al. [36] studied the
effect of the addition of surface modified coir fiber on the mechan-
ical properties of polyester composite. It showed that there is a sig-
nificant improvement in tensile properties in the case of alkali
treated composites. However, the better the flexural strength
was observed in the case of bleached coir-polyester composites.
Semsarzadeh [37] evaluated the effects of water absorption on
the various jute fibers reinforced and filler filled polyester resins.
It was stated that there is a possibility to obtain well performing
materials, using environment friendly reinforcements.
Joseph et al [38] studied the dynamic mechanical properties of
short sisal fiber-reinforced polypropylene composites. Composites
were containing both untreated and treated fibers with reference
to fiber loading, fiber length, chemical treatments, frequency, and
temperature. It can be seen that the addition of sisal fiber to neat
polypropylene increased the storage modulus. Both mechanical
strength and modulus were found to increase with fiber loading.
It is suggested that an optimum length of 2 mm is necessary to
get maximum modulus value. The research papers published in
the field of natural fiber-reinforced polymer composites, with spe-
cial reference to the effect of moisture absorption and alkali treat-
ment on the mechanical properties were reviewed by
Thiruchitrambalam et al. [39]. This review was extended to
machinability and the application of the soft computing technique
for modeling and optimization of mechanical properties for the
development of Roselle fiber-reinforced polyester composite. Saw-
pan et al. [40] investigated the flexural strength and flexural mod-
ulus of chemically treated random short and aligned long hemp
fiber reinforced polylactide and unsaturated polyester composites
over a range of fiber content. The authors found that the flexural
strength of the composites decreases with increase of fiber con-
tent; however, flexural modulus increased with increase of fiber
content (Figs. 2 and 3).
El-Shekeil et al. [41] studied the influence of fiber content on
mechanical and thermal properties of kenaf fiber-reinforced poly-
urethane composites. Composites were characterized by different
fiber loadings (20, 30, 40, and 50 wt%). It was clear that 30 wt%
fiber loading exhibited the better tensile strength, but modulus
values increased with increase of fiber content. The flexural
strength and modulus was increased with increase of fiber loading.
Also, the impact strength and thermal stability were decreased
with fiber loading.
Sujaritjun et al. [1] evaluated the tensile properties of untreated
and flexible epoxy treated bamboo, Vetiver grass and coconut
fibers reinforced polylactic acid composites based on the content
of fibers. It was found that the tensile strength of bamboo fiber
and coconut fiber reinforced polylactic acid composites is signifi-
cantly improved by the flexible epoxy surface treatment. Bamboo
fibers were proved to be the most effective reinforcing agent com-
pared to coconut and Vetiver grass fibers. Fahim et al. [42] studied
the mechanical properties of rice straw fiber-reinforced low den-
sity polyethelyne composites. Rice straw fibers were treated by
both alkali and acidic. It can be seen that the flexural stress of
the composite increased three times than flexural stress of the neat
4
Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx
resin sample. It was also observed that the tensile stress of com-
posite increased eight times than the tensile stress of the neat resin
sample. The mechanical properties of curaua fibers reinforced poly
(hydroxybutyrate-co-valerate) composites were investigated by
Rossa et al. [43]. It was observed that the addition of curaua fibers
to the poly(hydroxybutyrate-co-valerate) improved the mechani-
cal properties. It was also observed that composites with 20 and
30 wt% curaua fibers displayed a better level of mechanical
properties.
The conducting polypyrrole-coated banana fiber-reinforced
polyurethane composites were characterized by Merlini et al.
[44]. It was identified that the polypyrrole-coated banana fiber-
reinforced polyurethane composites exhibited higher mechanical
properties than pure polyurethane and polyurethane/conducting
polypyrrole composites. It was suggested that the conducting poly-
pyrrole fibers can also be used as reinforcement for polymer matrix
composites. The effects of process parameters on the mechanical
properties such as tensile, flexural and impact of randomly ori-
ented coir and bagasse fiber reinforced polyester hybrid compos-
ites were evaluated by Sivaraj & Rajeshkumar [45]. Mechanical
properties were also predicted based on the processing parame-
ters. It was identified that composite with 30 wt% of coir fiber
and 10 wt% of bagasse fiber shows better improvement in the val-
ues of tensile, flexural and impact strength. The fleuxral properties
of short coir fiber-reinforced polypropylene composite were stud-
ied by Udaykumar et al. [46] with varying fiber percentages (5, 10,
15, 20, and 25 wt%). Composites were developed by hand lay-up
techniques. It can be seen that flexural properties increase with
the increase of the fiber percentage; on the other hand, after a cer-
tain weight percentage of fiber the properties are decreased. It was
concluded that 20% of composite with 4 mm thickness showed
higher percentage of elongation.
3. Conclusion
There is an emergent interest among the researchers in the
growth of renewable resources (natural cellulose fillers) related
polymer composite. Natural cellulose fillers such as fibers and par-
ticles and are lightweight, environmentally friendly, renewable,
abundantly available and biodegradable. Natural cellulose fibers
like sisal, banana, kenaf, flax, jute, hemp, pineapple leaf and coir
are the most commonly used fibers to reinforce polymers. The
parts and components made from natural fiber reinforce polymer
composites have been used in various industrial and commercial
applications. However, the researches on these bio composites
are going on vigorously around the world, among the researchers
because environmental concerns are frightening the entire world.
This review paper presents the information related to natural fiber
reinforced polymer composites with respect of the type of fiber
and matrix, preparation methods, and evaluation methods. It is
suggested that natural fiber polymer composites can be prepared
with better performance using a detailed literature from the previ-
ous studies carried out on them.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing finan-
cial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared
to influence the work reported in this paper.
References
[1] W. Sujaritjun, P. Uawongsuwan, W. Pivsa-Art, H. Hamada, Energy Proc. 34
(2013) 664–672.
[2] A.K. Sinha, H.K. Narang, S. Bhattacharya, J. Polym. Eng. 37 (2013) 879–895.
[3] R. Yahaya, S.M. Sapuan, M. Jawaid, Z. Leman, E.S. Zainudin, Mater. Des. 67
(2015) 173–179.
S. Venkatarajan and A. Athijayamani
[4] R. Mahjoub, J.M. Yatim, A.R.M. Sam, M. Raftari, Mater. Des. 64 (2014) 640–649.
[5] M. Balachandar, B. Vijaya Ramnath, R. Barath, S. Bharath Sankar, Mater. Today:
Proc. 16 (2019) 1006–1012.
[6] S. Parbin, N.K. Waghmare, S.K. Singh, S. Khan, Proc. Comp. Sci. 152 (2019) 375–
379.
[7] J.Z. Lu, Q. Wu, I.I. Negulescu, Y. Chen, J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 102 (2006) 5607–
5619.
[8] S. Dixit, R. Goel, A. Dubey, P.R. Shivhare, T. Bhalavi, Polym. Rene. Res. 8 (2017)
71–78.
[9] M. Ashok Kumar, G. Ramachandra Reddy, Y. Siva Bharathi, S. Venkata Naidu, V.
Naga Prasad Naidu, J. Compos. Mater. 44 (2010) 3195–3198.
[10] E.A. Elbadry, M.S. Aly-Hassan, H. Hiroyuki, Adv. Mech. Eng. 2012 (2012) 1–12.
[11] F.J. Moscoso, L. Martínez, G. Canche, D. Rodrigue, R. González-Núñez, J. Appl.
Polym. Sci. 127 (2013) 599–606.
[12] F. Duc, P.E. Bourban, C.J.G. Plummer, J.A.E. Månson, Compos. Part A. 64 (2014)
115–123.
[13] K.L. Pickering, M.G. Aruan Efendy, T.M. Le, Compos. Part A: Appl. Sci. Manuf. 83
(2016) 98–112.
[14] B.C. Patel, S.K. Acharya, D. Mishra, Int. J. Eng. Sci. Technol. 4 (2012) 49–59.
[15] H. Fang, Y. Zhang, J. Deng, D. Rodrigue, J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 127 (2013) 942–949.
[16] H. Alomayri, F.U.A. Assaedi, I.M. Shaikh, J. Asian Ceram. Societ. 2 (2014) 223–
230.
[17] N.T. Phuong, S. Cyrille, G. Alain, J. Reinf. Plast. Compos. 29 (2010) 3244–3256.
[18] Q.T.H. Shubhra, A.K.M.M. Alam, M.A. Gafur, Fiber. Polym. 11 (2010) 725–731.
[19] M. Jawaid, H.P.S. Abdul Khalil, A. Hassan, Compos. Part B. 45 (2013) 619–624.
[20] H.N. Dhakal, Z.Y. Zhang, N. Bennett, Compo. Part B: Eng. 43 (2012) 2757–2761.
[21] G. Rajesh, A.V. Ratna Prasad, Proced. Mater. Sci. 4 (2014) 2188–2196.
[22] P. Peças, H. Carvalho, H. Salman, M. Leite, J. Compos. Sci. 2 (2018) 1–20.
[23] I. Maries, N.R. Neelakantan, O. Zachariah, J. Kuruvilla, S. Thomas, J. Appl. Polym.
Sci. 96 (2005) 1699–1709.
[24] A. Athijayamani, A. Sujin Jose, K. Ramanathan, S. Sidhardhan, J. Adv. Chem. 13
(2017) 6558–6562.
[25] A. Athijayamani, R. Ganesamoorthy, K.T. Loganathan, S. Sidhardhan, Polym
(Korea). 40 (2016) 1–8.
Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx
[26] SV.Joshi, L.T. Drzal, A.K. Mohanty, S. Arora, Compos. Part A: Appl. Sci. Manuf.,
35 (2004) 371–376.
[27] M.R. Murali, R. Mohana, A.V. Ratna, Mater. Des. 31 (2010) 508–513.
[28] V. Vasanta, P.A. Udayakumar, Ramalingaiah, Int. J. Innov. Res. Sci. Eng.
Technol. 2 (2013) 3779–3786.
[29] F.T. Torres, M.L. Cubillas, Polym. Test. 24 (2005) 694–698.
[30] W. Wang, M. Sain, P.A. Cooper, Compos. Sci. Technol. 66 (2006) 379–386.
[31] H.N. Dhakal, Z.Y. Zhang, M.O.W. Richardson, Compos. Sci. Technol. 67 (2007)
1674–1683.
[32] F.A. Silva, N. Chawla, D.T. Romildo Dias, Compos. Sci. Technol. 68 (2008) 3438–
3443.
[33] M. Bhowmick, S. Mukhopadhyay, R. Alagirusamy, Text. Prog. 44 (2012) 85–
140.
[34] G. Sèbe, N.S. Cetin, C.A.S. Hill, M. Hughes, Appl. Compos. Mater. 7 (2000) 341–
349.
[35] B.F. Yousif, A. Shalwan, C.W. Chin, K.C. Ming, Mater. Des. 40 (2012) 378–385.
[36] J. Rout, M. Mishra, S.S. Tripathy, S.K. Nayak, A.K. Mohanty, Polym. Compos. 22
(2001) 468–476.
[37] M.A. Semsarzadeh, Polym. Compos. 7 (2004) 23–25.
[38] P.V. Joseph, G. Mathew, K. Joseph, G. Groeninckx, S. Thomas, Compos. Part A:
Appl. Sci. Manuf. 34 (2003) 275–290.
[39] M. Thiruchitrambalam, A. Athijayamani, J. Nat. Fiber. 7 (2010) 307–323.
[40] M.A. Sawpan, K.L. Pickering, A. Fernyhough, Compos. Part A: Appl. Sci. Manuf.
43 (2012) 519–526.
[41] Y.A. El-Shekeil, S.M. Sapuan, K. Abdan, E.S. Zainudin, Mater. Des. 40 (2012)
299–303.
[42] I.S. Fahim, S.M. Elhaggar, H. Elayat, Mater. Sci. Appl. 3 (2012) 59–66.
[43] L.V. Rossa, L.C. Scienza, A.J. Zattera, Polym. Compos. 34 (2013) 450–456.
[44] C. Merlini, S.D.A.S. Ramôa, G.M.O. Barra, Polym. Compos. 34 (2013) 537–543.
[45] P. Sivaraj, G. Rajeshkumar, Int. J. Eng. Res. 3 (2014) 21–25.
[46] P.A. Udaykumar, S. Rajanna, Ramalingaiah, Int. J. Res. Eng. Technol. 03 (2014)
37–41.