See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/354410541

High-Density Fiberboard from Wood and Keratin Fibers: Physical and

Mechanical Properties

Article · September 2021

DOI: 10.2174/2666145414666210906152353

CITATIONS READS
0 26

1 author:

Menandro N Acda
University of the Philippines Los Baños
67 PUBLICATIONS 1,145 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Methods to Control Fungal Molds of Wooden Heritage Artifacts and Other Wooden Materials View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Menandro N Acda on 03 December 2022.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Send Orders for Reprints to reprints@benthamscience.net
154 Current Materials Science, 2022, 15, 154-163

RESEARCH ARTICLE

High-density Fiberboard from Wood and Keratin Fibers: Physical and

Mechanical Properties

Menandro N. Acda1,*

1
Department of Forest Products and Paper Science, University of the Philippines Los Banos, College, Laguna 4031,
Philippines

ARTICLE HISTORY
Received: January 25, 2021
Revised: June 11, 2021
Accepted: July 05, 2021
DOI:
10.2174/2666145414666210906152353
Abstract: Background: High-density Fiberboards (HDF) are widely used as a substitute for solid
wood in furniture, cabinet, construction materials, etc. Wood fibers are often used in the produc-
tion of HDF but the use of renewable materials has gained worldwide interest brought about by
global pressure to pursue sustainable development. An abundant source of renewable fibers that
can be used to produce HDF is keratin from waste chicken feathers. The goal of the study is to
investigate the use of keratin fibers in combination with wood fibers to produce HDF. No or lim-
ited studies have been conducted in this area and if successful, it could offer an alternative utiliza-
tion for the billions of kilograms of waste feather produced by the poultry industry. HDF is a high
volume feather utilization that can reduce pollution and help solve solid waste disposal problems
in many countries.
Methods: A series of dry-formed HDFs containing varying ratios of wood and keratin fibers
bonded by polyurethane resin were produced. The physical and mechanical properties of the
HDFs were determined.
Results: The properties of the HDFs were affected by varying ratios of wood particles and keratin
fibers. Dimensional stability as indicated by low levels of thickness swelling (<4.6%) and water
absorption (<10%) was observed. Internal bond (2.47 MPa), MOE (5.8 GPa) and MOR (45 MPa)
values were higher or comparable to those reported in the literature.
Conclusion: HDF formed using a combination of wood and keratin fibers bonded together by
polyurethane resin to as much as 50% keratin fibers were dimensionally stable with stiffness and
strength above the minimum requirements for general use HDF as prescribed by EN 622-5.

Keywords: High-density fiberboard, composites, keratin, chicken feather, polyurethane, wood.

1. INTRODUCTION Typically, HDF has a density of more than 820 kg

High-density fiberboard (HDF) is a composite
formed from lignocellulosic fibers combined with
an adhesive and consolidated under high tempera-
ture and pressure in a hot press. Wood fibers are
often used in the production of HDF [1,2] but ag-
ricultural residues (e.g., rice straw, corn stalk,
etc.) have also been investigated in the past [3, 4].
*Address correspondence to this author at the Department of Forest
Products and Paper Science, University of the Philippines Los
Banos, College, Laguna 4031, Philippines; E-mail: mnac-
da@up.edu.ph
m-3, making it harder and denser than the original
material from which it was made. HDF is widely
used as a substitute for solid wood in non-load
bearing applications in construction, furniture,
cabinet, window and door frames, appliances, etc.
[5]. Its high stability, density, and smooth surface
made it suitable for the application of various
coatings (varnishes, paints, etc.) and ease of pro-
cessing to various shapes for interior design appli-
cations [5]. In recent years, the use of renewable
resources has gained worldwide interest brought
about by global awareness and concern over the
impact of greenhouse gases on climate change [6].
Consequently, countries around the world seek

2666-1454/22 $65.00+.00 © 2022 Bentham Science Publishers

Physical and Mechanical Properties
cleaner and “greener” products and technologies
that do not compromise with their development
goals [7]. An abundant supply of renewable ma-
terial that can be used to produce HDF is keratin
fibers from waste chicken feathers. Waste feather
is a by-product of commercial chicken dressing
plants. Billions of kilograms of waste feathers are
produced annually to supply the demand for poul-
try meat [8]. The tremendous amount of feather
creates a serious solid waste disposal problem in
many countries [9, 10]. The problem is due to the
insoluble and highly durable chicken feather that
is very resistant to biodegradation [11]. Chicken
feather is made up of a polymer called keratin that
is cross-linked together to form a tough, strong
and lightweight natural fiber [12]. Previous stud-
ies had shown that Chicken Feather Fiber (CFF)
can be used as raw material for medium density
fiberboard [11, 13, 14], biocomposites [15-17],
textile and membranes [18, 19], carbon source
[20, 21] and reinforcement in cement composites
[22, 23]. The resulting boards from the latter
studies showed excellent strength and resistance
to biodegradation making it an attractive building
material in tropical countries [11, 22, 23]. How-
ever, no studies have been reported on the use of
feather (keratin) fibers alone or in combination
with lignocellulosic fibers as components of HDF.
The present paper reports on the use of keratin
fibers from waste chicken feather and wood fibers
bonded by polyurethane resin to produce HDF
and the resulting physico-mechanical properties of
the boards. HDF is a high-volume product that
can potentially utilize a significant amount of ker-
atin fibers from waste chicken feather in the envi-
ronment. Such utilization can help the environ-
ment by alleviating solid waste disposal problems,
reduce pollution and efficiently use an alternative
renewable fiber for sustainable development.
2. MATERIALS AND METHODS
2.1. Wood and Feather Fibers
Virgin refined fibers from Gmelina arborea
Roxb were obtained from the Pulp and Paper La-
boratory of the Forest Products Research and De-
velopment Institute (FPRDI), Department of Sci-
ence and Technology (DOST), College, Laguna,
Philippines. G. arborea is a popular and widely
used wood species for lumber and furniture pro-
duction in many countries in Southeast Asia [24].
Current Materials Science, 2022, Vol. 15, No. 2 155
The G. arborea fibers were produced using a la-
boratory refiner under atmospheric conditions.
The refining condition was not disclosed by
FPRDI. A commercial poultry dressing facility in
Lipa City, Batangas province, Philippines provid-
ed the waste chicken feathers. Chicken Feather
Fibers (CFF) were prepared by thoroughly wash-
ing feathers with water, laundry detergent and so-
dium chlorite to remove residual blood, manure
and dirt [22]. The clean feathers were then dried
under the sun for several days and then the fibers
were cut from the hollow shaft (rachis) using scis-
sors. Both Wood Fibers (WF) and CFF were
ground in a Wiley mill to pass 1 mm screen and
then dried in an oven at 100°C for 24 hours (Fig.
1). The groundwood fibers and CFF were then
sealed in polyethylene bags and stored at room
temperature prior to fiberboard production.
2.2. Polyurethane Adhesive
A one-component polyurethane resin (PUR
1964, AkzoNobel, Indonesia) was used in this
study. PUR 1964 is a fast-setting, waterproof ad-
hesive widely used in bonding wood for lamina-
tion and structural applications. It forms a dense
foam that quickly expands and penetrates wood
pores and effectively fills up joint areas. The PUR
1964 was dispersed in acetone to give 40% solids
to facilitate spraying to the wood fiber and CFF
during board formation. Acetone was successfully
used in the past to disperse polyurethane prepol-
ymers in the production of fiberboards [25, 26].
The acetone was subsequently evaporated from
the mix during the hot-pressing cycle.
2.3. Board Formation
A series of dry-formed HDF panels measuring
6 mm x 240 mm x 240 mm were fabricated at a
target density of 1,000 kg m-3 using various ratios
of wood fibers and CFF, viz., 100:0, 75:25, 50:50,
25:75, and 0:100 based on the oven-dry weight of
fibers. Wood fibers and CFF were uniformly
mixed in a laboratory mixer and sprayed while
tumbling with PUR dispersed in acetone (40%
solids) at 180 kPa pressure. The amount of PUR
used was 12% based on oven-dry weight of wood
fibers and was based on an initial laboratory trial.
No wax or other additives were used in this study.
The mixture was uniformly formed into a fiber
mat and consolidated by pressing between two
156 Current Materials Science, 2022, Vol. 15, No. 2
Fig. (1). G. arborea wood fibers and keratin fibers from chicken feather used in the production of high-density fiberboard. (A
higher resolution / colour version of this figure is available in the electronic copy of the article).
stainless plates of an electrically heated hydraulic
press (Wabash MPI, USA) using 140 kg cm-2
pressure and temperature of 140°C for 4 min. The
pressure was slowly released after board curing to
prevent residual acetone from blowing the panels.
The boards were trimmed after 24 h and then con-
ditioned for six weeks at 21°C and 65% relative
humidity prior to mechanical testing. Five repli-
cate boards were made for each treatment combi-
nation. Selected specimens were sliced in the
transverse section and the surface examined using
a desktop scanning electron microscope (Phenom
XL, Phenom-World BV, The Netherlands) operat-
ing at 15 kV.
2.4. Board Testing
Water absorption (WA) and thickness swelling
(TS) of the boards were measured following pro-
cedures of the ASTM D 1037 [27] to give indica-
tions of dimensional stability with moisture ab-
sorption. Three specimens (30 mm x 150 mm)
were cut from each experimental board and edge
sealed with epoxy adhesive. Fifteen specimens
were prepared for both TS and WA measure-
ments. WA and TS were measured by submerging
Menandro N. Acda
specimens in water at room temperature for 2 and
24 h. After each submersion period, samples were
drained of excess water and measured for an in-
crease in thickness and weight of the water ab-
sorbed. TS was measured from three marked
points along the length of each specimen and then
the average value was used. WA and TS were ex-
pressed as a percentage of the original weight and
thickness, respectively. Board density was deter-
mined by taking the ratio of specimen weight to
its volume by using dimensions and weights ob-
tained from WA and TS measurements.
Static bending to measure board stiffness
(modulus of elasticity, MOE), strength (modulus
of rupture, MOR) and Internal Bond (IB) to
measure interfiber adhesion were performed fol-
lowing ASTM D 1037 [27]. Two static bending
specimens (30 mm x 240 mm) and three IB spec-
imens (50mm x 50 mm) were cut from the center
of each replicate board. A total of 10 bending and
15 internal bond specimens were prepared for
each treatment combination. MOE, MOR, maxi-
mum load and deflection were determined for
each specimen by applying the load using a uni-
versal testing machine (AGS-X, Shimadzu, Japan)
Physical and Mechanical Properties
at a crosshead speed of 5 mm min-1. Load and de-
flection were continuously recorded using Shi-
madzu Trapezium X version 1.4.2 software. IB
was performed by gluing specimens to aluminum
blocks using a hot melt adhesive. Uniform load at
the rate of 1 mm min-1 was applied perpendicular
to the surface until failure using a universal test-
ing machine described above. The maximum load
necessary to pull the specimens apart was record-
ed accordingly. Data for mechanical properties
were fitted in a completely randomized design and
evaluated by analysis of variance (ANOVA) using
Statgraphics Centurion 18 software [28]. Treat-
ment means were separated by Tukey’s Honest
Significance Difference (HSD) test (α = 0.05).
3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
All boards were well formed with a light
brownish color and relatively smooth surface (Fig.
2). Apparently, the hooks and microscopic barbs
in the CFF [29] were not evident from the texture
of boards after consolidation under high tempera-
ture and pressure. HDF densities ranged from 985
to 998 kg m-3. The board densities were not sig-
nificantly different (p values > 0.05) and their ef-
fect, if any, on physical and mechanical properties
Fig. (2). Sections of HDF from various ratio of wood and keratin fibers: A (25% CFF), B(50% CFF), C (75% CFF, D (100%
CFF). (A higher resolution / colour version of this figure is available in the electronic copy of the article).
Current Materials Science, 2022, Vol. 15, No. 2 157
of HDF with varying amount of WF and CFF was
disregarded [1]. Thickness swelling and water
absorption were relatively low at 3-7% and 3-
12%, respectively after 24 h of water absorption
indicating the excellent dimensional stability of
the boards (Figs. 3 and 4). Comparable or higher
values of TS and WA have been reported for HDF
using various lignocellulosic materials bonded
with synthetic resins including banana bunch [3],
corn stalk [30] and wood fibers [1, 2, 31-34]. The
improvement in both TS and WA (p values <
0.001) of HDFs containing 25% to 100% CFF
compared to boards made from wood fibers alone
was observed in all HDFs tested in this study. The
decrease in TS and WA with an increasing pro-
portion of CFF could be due to the chemical prop-
erties of both fibers used in this study. Wood fi-
bers contain a relatively high amount of hygro-
scopic carbohydrates (cellulose and hemicellu-
lose) with significant hydroxyl groups in their
structure [35]. However, CFF consists of mostly
hydrophobic chemical complexes of the keratin
polymer [12]. Consequently, HDFs containing
more hygroscopic wood fibers exhibited slightly
higher TS and WA compared to boards containing
more hydrophobic CFF.
158 Current Materials Science, 2022, Vol. 15, No. 2 Menandro N. Acda

Fig. (3). Thickness swelling of HDF at various ratio of WF and CFF after 2 and 24 h soaking in water. Means between bars
for the same soaking period followed by the same letter were not significantly different (Tukey’s HSD, α = 0.05). (A higher
resolution / colour version of this figure is available in the electronic copy of the article).

Fig. (4). Water absorption of HDF at various ratio of WF and CFF after 2 and 24 h soaking in water. (A higher resolution /
colour version of this figure is available in the electronic copy of the article).
Internal bond, MOE and MOR of HDF using MPa) and strength (45 to 20 MPa) with increasing
various ratios of wood fibers and CFF were rela- CFF content could be due to the low compressi-
tively higher or comparable with that reported in bility of CFF resulting in less fiber to resin contact
the literature. The strength properties (IB, MOE [37, 38]. In comparison, wood fibers are relatively
and MOR) of HDFs from this study to as much as compressible at high temperature and pressure
50% CFF, all passed the minimum requirements [39] (Fig. 8). The surface chemistry of wood fi-
set by EN 622-5 [36] for general use high-density bers is altered at high temperature resulting in a
fiberboard (Figs. 5-7). However, there was a de- softened or plasticized state [40, 41]. The high
crease of up to two to four folds in IB, MOE and pressure during the hot press cycle, coupled with
MOR with increasing proportions of CFF (p val- the plasticized state of wood fibers, could have led
ues < 0.001) (Figs. 6 and 7). The decrease in IB to an improvement in intra-fiber contact resulting
(2,470 to 940 KPa), stiffness (5,800 to 3,100 in improved bond strength at the higher wood
Physical and Mechanical Properties Current Materials Science, 2022, Vol. 15, No. 2 159

Fig. (5). Internal bond of HDF at various ratio of WF and CFF. Means followed by the same letter were not significantly different
(Tukey’s HSD, α = 0.05). (A higher resolution / colour version of this figure is available in the electronic copy of the article).

Fig. (6). Modulus of elasticity (MOE) of HDF at various ratio of WF and CFF. (A higher resolution / colour version of this
figure is available in the electronic copy of the article).

Fig. (7). Modulus of rupture (MOR) of HDF at various ratio of WF and CFF. (A higher resolution / colour version of this fig-
ure is available in the electronic copy of the article).
160 Current Materials Science, 2022, Vol. 15, No. 2 Menandro N. Acda

Fig. (8). Scanning electron micrograph (SEM) of HDF surface (1000x) containing 75% WF and 25% CFF. (A higher resolu-
tion / colour version of this figure is available in the electronic copy of the article).

Table 1. Physical and mechanical properties of HDF produced in the current study in comparison with HDF from wood fibers
and agricultural residues reported in the literature.

Parameters This Study [2] [31] [32] [33] [X] [XX] [000]

Recycled Wood
Wood Wood Wood Wood Fibers
Recycled (F. sylvatica
Fiber Used (G. arborea), Wood
Fibers (Populus sp) (P. sylvestris) (P. sylvestris) (P. sylvestris and Q. cer-
Keratin
and P. abies) ris)

Adhesive* PUR PF RPF MUF MUF DMDHEU MUF UF + ALS

Density (kgm-3) 800 - 1100 900 100 - 1300 890 - 900 840 - 1140 900 1130 910

TS (%)** 1.63 - 6.96 4.1 - 5.5 3.4 - 5.3 9.6 – 10.4 9.9 - 11.71 15 - 72 20.0 - 27.5 12.9 – 18.3

WA (%)** 2.77 - 12.34 39 - 52 8.9 - 11.5 - - - 36 - 63 26.1 - 31.5

MOE (GPa) 3.38 - 5.78 1.98 - 3.93 5-6 4.9 - 5.1 4.08 - 4.09 4.0 - 9.5 4.63 - 5.88 3.19 – 4.11

MOR (MPa) 20.2 - 47.2 19.3 - 45 58.6 - 64.3 50 - 53 51.1 - 55.8 25 -53 58.3 - 61.7 30.9 – 40.5

1.68 -
IB (MPa) 0.94 - 3.47 0.66 - 2.0 2.9 - 6.7 0.61 - 1.15 0.31 - 0.80 0.70 - 1.33 0.58 – 0.57
2.03
*PUR- polyurethane resin; UF- urea formaldehyde; PF- phenol formaldehyde; RPF- resol phenol formaldehyde; MUF- melamine urea formaldehyde; pMDI-polymeric methylene
diphenyl diisocyanate; ALS- ammonium lignosulfonate.
**After 24 h soak in water.
Table 1. Contd…
Physical and Mechanical Properties
[3] [4] [0]
Corn Biomass
Banana Bunch Wheat Straw Rice Straw
(Stalks, Husks, Leaves)
- - - MDI
1000 900-1100 950 - 1000 850 - 1200
3.33 - 310 34 - 65 20 - 26
27.9 - 81.8 42 - 86 30 - 50
1.20 - 3.06 1.9 - 5.16 4.2 – 4.8
8.46 - 24.14 30 - 53 38 - 47
0.02 - 0.29 0.19 - 1.53 1.0 – 1.20
fiber content. Scanning electron microscopy
(SEM) of HDF surface showed collapsed and
compressed wood fibers, as well as embedded
keratin fibers, which would support the above
statement (Fig. 8). However, despite this decreas-
ing trend, HDFs from a combination of CFF and
WF obtained in this study were comparable in
mechanical properties and dimensional stability to
HDF from wood fibers but stronger and more sta-
ble compared with HDF from agricultural residues
(Table 1). The use of PUR could have also contrib-
uted to the high bond strength of the resulting HDF
in this study. When used as a binder in fiber-
reinforced composites, PURs are known for their
superior strength, versatility and superior resistance
to water and climatic conditions [42-45].
CONCLUSIONS
In general, the study showed that keratin fibers
from waste chicken feather can be used as an alter-
native material in combination with wood fibers
bonded together with polyurethane resin to produce
high-density fiberboard. Dimensional stability of
HDF in terms of thickness swelling and water ab-
sorption after 24 h soaking in water was relatively
low. The low levels of TS (<4.6%) and WA
(<10%) when CFF was incorporated into HDF
could be due to the hydrophobic nature of the ker-
atin polymer complex. Mechanical properties of
HDF from the current study as indicated by inter-
nal bond, stiffness and strength were higher or
comparable to those reported in the literature.
Although there was a decrease in IB, MOE and
MOR with increasing CFF content, the HDF
formed in this study remained above the minimum
requirements for general use HDF as prescribed
by EN 622-5 [23]. Considering the good dimen-
Current Materials Science, 2022, Vol. 15, No. 2 161
[[00] [34] [000]
Tall Oil Distillation
Bagasse/Bamboo
Products
MUF pMDI/UF
860 1010 - 1150
14 -32 7.5 - 16 13 - 17
20 - 52 - -
1.8 – 4.2 2.9 - 3.4 3.6 – 3.8
22 - 36 28 - 39 32 - 40
1.3 – 2.6 1.4 - 2.1 1.2 – 1.4
sional stability and high strength properties of
HDF, these boards are well suited for applications
that commonly use medium to high-density fiber-
board from wood fibers for general construction,
paneling, sidings, furniture and door parts compo-
nents. Lastly, the potential use of keratin fibers
from waste chicken feather as raw material in the
production of fiberboard could potentially help
alleviate solid waste disposal problems in the
poultry industry, and the efficient utilization of
this biomass material.
CURRENT AND FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS
There is an urgent need for the efficient use
or disposal of waste chicken feather. This waste
product from commercial poultry processing
plants causes pollution and poses a serious solid
waste disposal problem in many countries. Kera-
tin fibers from chicken feather have been investi-
gated in recent years for various applications to
address the problem. Research on the use of kera-
tin fibers in textile manufacture, biocomposites,
carbon source, biofuel, additive in plastic and
concrete, electronics, among others, has been
conducted. With the current clamor for the use of
renewable resources to achieve sustainable devel-
opment, the use of keratin fibers will continue to
be investigated in the near future. However, to
reduce the amount of waste feather in the envi-
ronment, a high-volume application of keratin fi-
ber such as components of composites for build-
ing materials, should be developed.
CONSENT FOR PUBLICATION
Not applicable.
162 Current Materials Science, 2022, Vol. 15, No. 2
AVAILABILITY OF DATA AND
MATERIALS
The authors confirm that the data supporting
the findings of this research are available within
the article.
FUNDING
This research is funded by the Discovery-
Applied Research and Extension for Trans/Inter-
disciplinary Opportunities (DARETO) Grants
Program, Commission on Higher Education
(CHED).
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
The author declares no conflict of interest, fi-
nancial or otherwise.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The author wishes to thank the Discovery-
Applied Research and Extension for Trans/Inter-
disciplinary Opportunities (DARETO) Grants
Program, Commission on Higher Education
(CHED) for providing funding support for this
project; Ms. Danagene San Gabriel and Mr. NU
Valguna of the Department of Forest Products and
Paper Science, CFNR-UPLB are acknowledged
for assistance in feather collection, preparation
and board formation.
REFERENCES
[1] Ayrilmis N. Effect of panel density on dimensional stabil-
ity of medium and high-density fiberboards. J Mater Sci
2007; 42: 8551-7.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10853-007-1782-8
[2] Oh YS. Effects of recycled fiber addition on high-density
fiberboard for laminated flooring bonded with phenol-
formaldehyde resin adhesive. J Appl Polym Sci 2010; 115:
641-5.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/app.30435
[3] Quintana G, Velasquez J, Betancourt S, Ganan P. Binder-
less fiberboard from steam exploded banana bunch. Ind
Crops Prod 2009; 29: 60-6.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.indcrop.2008.04.007
[4] Theng D, Arbat G, Aguilara MD, Vilaseca F, Ngo B, Mut-
je M. All-lignocellulosic fiberboard from corn biomass and
cellulose nanofibers. Ind Crops Prod 2006; 76: 166-73.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.indcrop.2015.06.046
[5] Stark NM, Cai Z, Carll C. Wood-Based Composite Materi-
als.Wood handbook-Wood as an engineering material
General Technical Report FPL-GTR-190 Department of
Menandro N. Acda
Agriculture, Forest Service, Forest Products Laboratory.
Madison, WI, USA 2010; pp. 251-78.
[6] Heinimo J, Junginger M. Production and trading of bio-
mass for energy-an overview of the global status. Biomass
Bioenergy 2009; 33: 1310-20.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2009.05.017
[7] UNCTAD. New innovation approaches to support the im-
plementation of the sustainable development goals. The
United Nations Conference on Trade and Development.
New York, USA. 2017; pp. 14-20.
[8] USDA. Livestock and poultry: World markets and trade.
Washington, DC: USDA Foreign Agricultural Service
2018; pp. 1-8.
[9] Parkinson G. Chementator: A higher use for lowly chicken
feathers? Chem Eng 1998; 105: 21.
[10] McGovern V. Recycling poultry feathers: more bang for
the cluck. Environ Health Perspect 2000; 108(8): A366-9.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/ehp.108-a366 PMID: 10964806
[11] Barone JR, Schmidt WF. Polyethylene reinforced with
keratin fibers obtained from chicken feather. Compos Sci
Technol 2005; 65: 173-81.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compscitech.2004.06.011
[12] Staron S, Banach Z, Kowalski Z. Keratin - Origins, proper-
ties, application. Chemik 2011; 65: 1019-26.
[13] Winandy JE, Muehl JH, Glaeser JA, Schmidt W. Chicken
feather fiber as an additive in MDF composites. J Nat Fi-
bers 2014; 4: 35-48.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J395v04n01_04
[14] Taghiyari H, Majidi R, Esmailpour A, Samadi YS, Asghar
Jahangiri A, Papadopoulos AN. Engineering composites
made from wood and chicken feather bonded with UF resin
fortified with wollastonite: A novel approach. Polymers
(Basel) 2020; 12: 857.
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/polym12040857
[15] Cheng S, Lau K, Liu T, Zhao Y, Lam PM, Yin Y. Mechan-
ical and thermal properties of chicken feather fiber/PLA
green composites. Compos, Part B Eng 2009; 40: 650-4.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2009.04.011
[16] Jung D, Persi I, Bhattacharyya D. Synergistic effects of
feather fibers and phosphorus compound on chemically
modified chicken feather/polypropylene composites. ACS
Sustain Chem Eng 2019; 7: 19072-80.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acssuschemeng.9b04894
[17] Aranberri I, Montes S, Azcune I, Rekondo A, Grande HJ.
Fully biodegradable biocomposites with high chicken
feather content. Polymers (Basel) 2017; 9(11): 593.
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/polym9110593 PMID: 30965893
[18] Ma B, Qiao X, Hou X, Yang Y. Pure keratin membrane
and fibers from chicken feather. Int J Biol Macromol 2016;
89: 614-21.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2016.04.039 PMID:
27180293
[19] Shanmugasundaram OL, Syed Zameer Ahmed K, Sujatha
K, et al. Fabrication and characterization of chicken feather
keratin/polysaccharides blended polymer coated nonwoven
dressing materials for wound healing applications. Mater
Sci Eng C 2018; 92: 26-33.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.msec.2018.06.020 PMID:
30184750
[20] Singh SK, Prakash H, Akhtar MJ, Kar KK. Lightweight
and high-performance microwave absorbing heteroatom-
doped carbon derived from chicken feather fibers. ACS
Sustain Chem Eng 2018; 6: 5381-93.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acssuschemeng.8b00183
Physical and Mechanical Properties
[21] Zonglin L, Reimer C, Picard, Mohanty AK, Misra M.
Characterization of chicken feather biocarbon for use in
sustainable biocomposites. Front Mater 2020; 7: 3.
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fmats.2020.00003
[22] Acda MN. Waste chicken feather as reinforcement in ce-
ment bonded composites. Philipp J Sci 2010; 139: 161-6.
[23] Acda MN. Sustainable use of waste chicken feather for
durable and low-cost building materials for tropical cli-
mates. In sustainable Agriculture: Technology, Planning
and Management. New York: Nova Science Publishers,
Inc. 2010; pp. 353-66.
[24] World agroforestry center database: A tree reference and
selection guide version 4.0. Available from:
http://www.worldagroforestry.org/output/agroforestreedata
base [accessed 30 November 2020].
[25] Kawasaki T, Zhang M, Kawai S. Manufacture and proper-
ties of ultra-low-density fiberboard. J Wood Sci 1998; 44:
354-60.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01130447
[26] Azman AM, Baharum A, Badri KH. Efficacy of fibre as-
pect ratio and prepolymerised polyurethane as binder in
enhancing strength of palm-based fibreboard. Polym Com-
pos 2016; 24: 789-94.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/096739111602400916
[27] American Society for Testing Materials. Standard D 1037:
Standard Test Methods of Evaluating Properties of Wood-
Base Fiber and Particle Panel Materials.Annual Book of
ASTM Standards. 4.09 Wood. ASTM Philadelphia, PA
1999.
[28] Centurion S. 18 Statgraphics 18 for Windows User’s Man-
ual. Rockville, MD: Manugistics Inc. 2019.
[29] Reddy N, Yang Y. Structure and properties of chicken
feather barbs as natural protein fibers. J Polym Environ
2007; 15: 81-7.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10924-007-0054-7
[30] Mobarak F, Nada AM. Fibreboard from exotic raw materi-
als. II. Hardboard from undebarked cotton stalks. J Appl
Chem Biotechnol 1975; 25: 659-62.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jctb.5020250904
[31] Tang Q, Fang L, Guo W. Investigation into mechanical,
thermal, flame retardant properties of wood fiber rein-
forced ultra-high-density fiberboards. Bioresourcs 2017;
12: 6749-62.
http://dx.doi.org/10.15376/biores.12.3.6749-6762
[32] Mahrdt E, Herwijnen HWG, Kantner W, et al. Adhesive
distribution related to mechanical performance of high-
density wood fibre board. Int J Adhes 2017; 78: 23-7.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijadhadh.2017.06.013
[33] Sala CM, Robles E, Kowaluk G. Influence of adding off-
cuts and trims with a recycling approach on the properties
DISCLAIMER: The above ar ticle has been published, as is, ahead-of-pr int, to pr ovide ear ly visibility but is
not the final ver sion. Major publication pr ocesses like copyediting, pr oofing, typesetting and fur ther r eview
ar e still to be done and may lead to changes in the final published ver sion, if it is eventually published. All
legal disclaimer s that apply to the final published ar ticle also apply to this ahead-of-pr int ver sion.
View publication stats
Current Materials Science, 2022, Vol. 15, No. 2 163
of high-density fibrous composites. Polymers (Basel) 2020;
12(6): 1327-41.
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/polym12061327 PMID:
32532130
[34] Hosseinpourpia R, Adamopoulos S, Walther T, Naydenov
V. Hydrophobic formulations based on tall oil distillation
products for high-density fiberboards. Materials (Basel)
2020; 13(18): 4025-38.
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma13184025 PMID: 32927923
[35] Sjostrom E. Wood Chemistry: Fundamentals and Applica-
tions. 2nd ed. CA, USA: Academic Press 1993.
[36] EN 622-5. Fibreboards - Specifications - Part
5Requirements for dry process boards (MDF). European
Committee for Standardization 2009.
[37] Kim YR, McCarthy SP, Fanucci JP. Compressibility and
relaxation of fiber reinforcements during composite pro-
cessing. Polym Compos 1991; 12: 13-9.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pc.750120104
[38] Schmidt WF. Microcrystalline Keratin: From Feathers to
Composite Products. Materials Research Society Symposi-
um Proceedings 2011. In: Cambridge University Press;
2011.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1557/PROC-702-U1.5.1
[39] Koubaa A, Koran Z. Effect of press-drying parameters on
paper properties. Pulp and Paper Processing. London, UK:
IntechOpen 2018; pp. 564-84.
http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.76508
[40] Hillis WE, Rozsa A. The softening temperatures of wood.
Holzforschung 1978; 32: 68-73.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/hfsg.1978.32.2.68
[41] Hillis W. High temperature and chemical effects on wood
stability. Part 1. General considerations. Wood Sci Technol
1984; 18: 281-93.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00353364
[42] Gadhave RV, Mahanwar PA, Gadekar PT. Methods for
polyurethane and polyurethane composites, recycling, and
recovery: a review. React Funct Polym 2017; 67: 675-92.
[43] Kuranska M, Prociak A. Porous polyurethane composites
with natural fibres. Compos Sci Technol 2012; 72: 299-
304.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compscitech.2011.11.016
[44] Fiorelli J, Curtolo DD, Barrero NG, Savastano H Jr, Pal-
lonea EJA, Johnson R. Particulate composite based on co-
conut fiber and castor oil polyurethane adhesive: an eco-
efficient product. Ind Crops Prod 2012; 40: 69-75.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.indcrop.2012.02.033
[45] Chen YC, Tai W. Castor oil-based polyurethane resin for
low-density composites with bamboo charcoal. Polymers
(Basel) 2018; 10(10): 1100-12.
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/polym10101100 PMID:
30961025