INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XIV, Issue I, January 2025
www.ijltemas.in Page 209
Mechanical Properties of Rattan Cane (Calamus Longipinna)-Filled
Low Density Polyethylene (LDPE) Composite
Cyprian Y. Abasi*, Juliet Gbenowei, and Oguarabau Benson
Department of Chemical Sciences, Niger Delta University, Wilberforce Island, Bayelsa State, Nigeria
*Corresponding Author
DOI : https://doi.org/10.51583/IJLTEMAS.2025.1401022
Received: 28 January 2025; Accepted: 01 February 2025; Published: 17 February 2025
Abstract: This study explored the mechanical properties of both treated and untreated rattan cane (Calamus longippina)
integrated with low-density polyethylene (LDPE) composite. The composite was produced by mixing different amounts (5-40 g)
of rattan powder, under 180 microns in size, into 40 g of LDPE. The mechanical properties of the treated and untreated
composites were analyzed. The tensile strength of LDPE was reduced by 59.36% for untreated composites and 62.56% for treated
ones with the addition of rattan cane filler. The elongation at break decreased by 70.82% for untreated and 69.5% for treated
composites. The Young's modulus increased by 68.85% for untreated and 69.70% for treated composites as the filler content
increased. Impact strength declined with higher filler content by 68.96% for untreated and 69.36% for treated composites.
Hardness improved with higher filler content by 57.04% for untreated and 57.36% for treated composites. Flexural strength
dropped by 59.33% for untreated and 60.69% for treated composites as filler content increased. The composite's weight loss
increased with more filler, reaching a maximum of 3.7% in soil burial tests at 40% filler content. Water absorption rose with more
filler, peaking at 13.18% for the 40% filler content. Adding rattan powder enhanced the mechanical properties initially, but
further additions led to a decline as LDPE could not effectively transfer the load between fibers. Overall, treated composites
showed better mechanical properties compared to untreated ones.
Keywords: Rattan cane, Low Density Polyethylene, Mechanical properties, Filler weight, Treated, Untreated
I. Introduction
Polymers, whether natural or synthetic, are integral to human existence and industry. Synthetic polymers are widely used in
industrial equipment and household appliances, particularly in electrical and electronic devices due to their hydrophobic and
insulating properties. These materials provide protection and waterproofing. Over time, synthetic polymers have significantly
benefited the global economy. However, their non-biodegradability has led to an accumulation of synthetic plastic waste, posing a
threat to environmental sustainability if not regulated. Low-density polyethylene (LDPE) has been extensively studied due to its
flexibility compared to high-density polyethylene (HDPE). LDPE can be easily modified by adding other materials to its polymer
matrix, creating composite materials for various applications.
The introduction of matrix additives does not significantly alter the molecular structure of polymers (Answari et al., 2016). Rattan
cane (Calamus longipinna) is a non-wood forest plant traditionally used for binding materials and various household items
(Weinstock, 1983). It is widely utilized in the furniture industry, resulting in substantial waste from discarded rattan poles. The
disposal of this waste is a concern due to its potential environmental impact, contributing to landfill space and causing pollution
through open burning. Given the high strength and flexibility of rattan cane pole waste, there is significant interest in using it as a
filler for plastic composites (Ismail et al., 2012; Muniandy et al., 2012). However, there is limited research on LDPE and rattan
cane filler composites. This study aims to examine some of the mechanical properties of these composites to provide valuable
information for further use.
II. Materials and Methods
Materials: Low-density polyethylene (LDPE 20FS0I0) was sourced from Indorama Eleme Petrochemicals Limited, Port
Harcourt, Nigeria. Bio-filler (Rattan cane) was obtained from Swali market, Yenagoa, Bayelsa State, Nigeria. A mild steel mold
(100 x 50 x 15 mm) was locally fabricated. Potassium hydroxide (KOH) was purchased from Molychem, India. A Universal
Testing Machine was provided by the Mechanical Engineering Laboratory, Niger Delta University.
Bio-filler Preparation:Rattan canes were cleaned and chopped into smaller pieces. Fifty percent (50%) of the chopped canes
were treated with a potassium hydroxide (KOH) solution using the method outlined by Oladele and Okoro (2015) to increase the
adhesive properties of the cane. This treatment also helped preserve the particles and reduce contamination when incorporated
into the matrix. The treated canes were then washed with distilled water and sun-dried to remove moisture. Both treated and
untreated rattan cane pieces were ground into powder and sieved to an average mesh size below 180 microns using a standard test
sieve. The treated and untreated rattan cane powder was then oven-dried at 80°C for 24 hours to eliminate excess moisture.
Composite Sample Preparation: The composite sample was created by melt-mixing the polymer matrix and the bio-filler at
114°C for 7 minutes. The homogenized mixture was then transferred into a mild steel mold for shaping and sizing.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XIV, Issue I, January 2025
www.ijltemas.in Page 210
Property Testing: Tensile, flexural, and hardness tests were conducted using a universal testing machine (Instron 3366)
following ASTM D-638 standards. An impact pendulum tester (Zwick) was utilized for impact tests under a 7.5 J load. Soil burial
and water absorption tests were performed based on methods by Obasi and Onuegbu (2013) and ASTM D-1037-99 standards,
respectively. Nine specimens were used to obtain average values for tensile strength, elongation-at-break, and Young's modulus.
Tensile Strength: The tensile strength at break was calculated using the equation provided in 1
Tensile strength
Breaking force in (N)
Original cross sectional Area in
------------- (1)
Flexural Strength :The flexural strength was determined using equation 2;
δF
3Ff
2b
= --------------- (2)
Where, Ff is the load of fracture, L is the distance between support points, d is the height of the specimen and b is the specimen’s
width.
Hardness: Hardness was determined by measuring the permanent depth of the indentation.
Equation 3 was used to calculated the hardness value.
HV =
=
-------------- (3)
Where, HV = Hardness Value
F = Test Force (N)
α =Indenter face contact angle = 136°
d = Average diagonal length (m)
Soil Burial Test: Samples were weighed and buried in soil-filled boxes with tiny apertures. Following previously adopted
methods, the soil was maintained at around 20% moisture content by mass, and the samples were buried at a depth of 15 cm
(Obasi and Onuegbu, 2013). Once a week, the samples were retrieved from the soil, washed with distilled water, dried, and
measured to obtain new results before being reburied. The percentage weight loss was calculated using Equation 4.
-------------(4)
where M
o
is the composite sample’s initial mass before burial and M
d
is the degradation mass at each week. The average of
eight samples were used to calculate the % weight reduction
Water Absorption Study: The water absorption tests were conducted using the standard method ASTM D-1037-99. To estimate
the amount of water absorbed, a 15 x 15 x 3 mm composite sample was soaked in distilled water for 8 weeks at a constant
temperature of 25°C. The weight increase was measured weekly. The sample's water absorption at ambient temperature was
calculated using Equation 5.
M
t
(percent) =
x 100 ------------ (5)
The amount of water absorbed at time t is denoted by M
t
.
W
t
is the sample’s weight at time, t.
W
o
is the composite sample beginning weight.
Young’s Modulus: Young’s modulus is a material's mechanical property to withstand compression or elongation relative to its
original length. It was calculated using Equation 6.
E =
--------------- (6)
Where E = Young’s modulus
= stress in Pascals (Pa)
= Strain
F = Force applied in newton (N)
A = Area in square metre (m
2
)
L = Initial length in metre (m)
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XIV, Issue I, January 2025
www.ijltemas.in Page 211
L = Change in length
Elongation at Break: Elongation at break is the percentage of elongation relative to the initial size when breakage occurs. It was
calculated using Equation 7.
Elongation = = (L / L ) x 100 ------------- (7)
Where L = final length
L = Initial length
III. Results and Discussion
This section presents the mechanical properties of pure LDPE and LDPE-rattan fiber composites for treated and untreated
samples. The effects of adding rattan fibers to the polymer matrix and varying rattan composition in the composites are discussed.
Tensile Properties
A biodegradable polymer must endure normal stress during its application. Tensile tests were conducted to investigate the tensile
properties of pure LDPE and rattan-filled LDPE for treated and untreated composite samples. Figures 3.1 to 3.8 illustrate the
effects of filler concentration on the tensile strength,Young’s modulus, elongation at break, and other properties of the composite
films.
Tensile Strength
From the plot in Figure 3.1, it is observed that adding rattan powder reduced the polymer's tensile strength from 38 MPa to 12
MPa for the untreated and from 20 MPa to 7.5 MPa for the treated, representing about a 62.5% decrease. Similarly, rattan cane
powder reduced the tensile strength of LDPE by approximately 59.36% for untreated and 62.56% for treated composites. Similar
findings were reported by other researchers (Demir et al., 2006; Yang et al., 2004) who also used natural fillers in polymer
matrices. Rattan is known to be hydrophilic (Wahab et al., 2016), causing poor compatibility with hydrophobic LDPE. The
introduction of rattan powder creates an interface between the LDPE matrix and rattan powder that cannot efficiently transfer
stress.
The tensile strength for both treated and untreated composites decreased steadily with increasing filler loading. According to
Mwaikambo and Ansell (2012), more filler leads to more filler-filler interactions. These increased interactions could result in
rattan filler aggregation within the LDPE matrix. The authors noted that rattan fibers contain hydroxyl groups in their amorphous
regions, which could hinder the ability of rattan powder to develop adhesion with non-polar polymer materials.
Figure 3.1. Effect of filler loading on tensile strength of treated and untreated LDPE-rattan composites.
Young’s Modulus
The Young’s tensile modulus for LDPE composites with varying amounts of rattan for treated and untreated samples is shown in
Figure 3.2. Young’s modulus, which measures a solid material's stiffness, increased for both treated and untreated composites
with rising % filler loading, from 45 MPa to 155 MPa—about a 70.96% increase. Specifically, Young’s modulus rose by 68.88%
for untreated and 69.07% for treated composites. Fillers contributed to this increase by inhibiting polymer chain mobility, thus
adding rigidity to the composite. John and Thomas (2008) attributed this stiffness to the cellulosic nature of the rattan filler.
0.00
5.00
10.00
15.00
20.00
25.00
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Tensile Strength(MPa)
% Filler Loading
Tensile Strength
UNTREATED TREATED
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XIV, Issue I, January 2025
www.ijltemas.in Page 212
Figure 3.2. Effect of filler loading on Young’s Moduli treated and untreated LDPE-rattan composites.
Elongation at Break
The effect of filler addition on the elongation at break for both treated and untreated composites is illustrated in Figure 3.3. As
filler loading increases, the tendency for filler-filler agglomeration also rises, forming stress-concentrated areas that can lead to
composite failure. These areas may also create voids (Ansari and Ismail, 2009). Poor stress transfer from rattan agglomerates can
result in brittle behavior, reducing elongation at break, as shown in Figure 3.3. Similar observations were made by Zaini et al.,
(1996) and Tajvidi and Ebrahimi (2003). For both treated and untreated samples, percent elongation at break decreased with
rising filler loading, from 37% to 12%, with untreated composites reducing by 70.82% and treated by 69.5%.
Figure 3.3: Effect of filler loading on elongation-at-break of treated and untreated LDPE-rattan composites.
Soil Burial Test
The biodegradability of pure LDPE and LDPE-rattan composites was studied through a soil burial test, calculated using Equation
4. The percentage weight loss, shown in Figure 3.4, increased with higher bio-filler content. Pure LDPE showed negligible weight
loss after 6 weeks (0.002%), indicating its resistance to microbial attack. However, composites displayed steady weight loss with
rising filler content, reaching 6.29% at 40% filler content. This rapid initial loss, slowing after two weeks, is attributed to
microorganisms consuming the filler and creating pores in the polymer matrix (Obasi and Onuegbu, 2013). The high water
absorptivity of rattan fibres also contributed to biodegradability.
Figure 3.4. Effect of filler loading on Biodegradability susceptibility(% weight loss) of LDPE-rattan composites.
0
50
100
150
200
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Young’s Modulus (MPa)
% Filler Loading
Young’s Modulus
UNTREATED TREATED
0
50
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Elongation at Break
(%)
% Filler Loading
Elongation at Break
UNTREATED TREATED
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XIV, Issue I, January 2025
www.ijltemas.in Page 213
Water Absorption
The water absorptivity of the LDPE matrix and composites, expressed as percentage water absorption over time, is depicted in
Figure 3.5. Water absorption increased with filler content due to the hydrophilic nature of rattan powder. Similar findings were
reported by Obasi and Onuegbu (2013) and Bikiaris and Panayiotou (1998). The highest water absorption, 31.89%, was recorded
at 40% filler content.
Figure 3.5. Effect of filler loading on water absorptivity of LDPE-rattan composites.
Impact Test
Figure 3.6 shows the effect of filler loading on the impact behavior of pure LDPE and LDPE-rattan composites (treated and
untreated). Impact strength decreased with increasing filler content by 68.96% for untreated and 69.36% for treated composites.
This reduction indicates insufficient matrix to transmit stress after impact. High filler content led to agglomeration, creating stress
concentration zones that required less energy to propagate cracks.
Figure 3.6. Effect of filler loading on impact strength of untreated and treated LDPE-rattan composites.
Hardness
The hardness of pure LDPE and LDPE-rattan composites (treated and untreated) is shown in Figure 3.7. Hardness increased with
rising filler content, by 57.04% for untreated and 57.36% for treated composites, due to the rigidity imparted by cellulosic rattan
powder. However, this increase in hardness resulted in greater brittleness due to poor interfacial bonding between components.
Figure 3.7. Effect of filler loading on hardness value of LDPE-rattan composites.
0
50
100
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Impact Strength
(kJ/m
2
)
% Filler Loading
Impact Strength
UNTREATED TREATED
0.00
50.00
100.00
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Hardness (Hv
)
% Filler Loading
Hardness
UNTREATED TREATED
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XIV, Issue I, January 2025
www.ijltemas.in Page 214
Flexural Strength
Flexural strength, obtained through flexural testing using a Universal Testing Machine, is shown in Figure 3.8. Increasing filler
content decreased the flexural strength of composites, by 59.33% for untreated and 60.69% for treated samples. The results
corroborate the hardness tests, where increased filler content led to greater brittleness, reducing flexural strength due to poor
bonding between the polymer matrix and rattan powder.
Figure 3.8. Effect of filler loading on the flexural strength of LDPE-rattan composites.
Performance Contrast between Untreated and Treated Composites
The treated composite exhibited greater improvements in mechanical properties compared to the untreated, except for elongation
at break, where the untreated composite showed a higher percent decrease. Addition of rattan powder improved properties like
Young’s modulus and hardness, but other properties decreased as LDPE could not effectively transfer the load between fibres.
Treatment likely enhanced matrix adhesion and filler loading, increasing Young’s modulus and hardness. Alkaline treatment is
known to enhance cellulosic H-bonding OH groups, imparting greater strength through strong intermolecular interactions (Boey
et al., 2022).
The relationship between untreated and treated samples’ data sets was analyzed using Pearson correlation coefficient (r) in
Microsoft Excel. The correlation coefficients for various properties are presented in Table 1. All values of the correlation
coefficient (r) are close to 1, indicating a very strong positive linear relationship, meaning that as the properties of untreated
composites increase, so do those of treated composites, almost linearly with filler weight.
Table 1: Pearson Correlation coefficient values of the mechanical properties of the untreated and treated rattan - filled LDPE
composites
Composite Mechanical Property
(Untreated & Treated)
Pearson Correlation Coefficent (r)
Tensile strength
0.9982
Flexural strength
0.9942
Elongation at break
0.9893
Young’s modulus
0.9971
Impact test
0.9989
Hardness
0.9993
IV. Conclusion
The mechanical properties of both untreated and treated LDPE-rattan filler composites were studied. An increase in filler loading
led to reductions in tensile strength, flexural strength, impact strength, and elongation at break for both types of composites. This
decline is likely due to weak interfacial bonding between the polymer matrix and rattan filler. However, Young's modulus and
hardness increased with higher filler loading, by over 65% and 55% respectively for both untreated and treated composites.
Higher filler content also resulted in greater weight loss and water absorption, with the highest weight loss of 6.29% and water
absorption of 31.89% observed at 40% filler content.
0
1
2
3
4
5
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Flexural Strength (GPa)
% Filler loading
Flexural Strength
UNTREATED TREARED
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XIV, Issue I, January 2025
www.ijltemas.in Page 215
Rattan cane (Calamus longippina), a natural fiber, can be combined with an LDPE polymer matrix to modify mechanical
properties in both untreated and treated forms. Treated composites exhibited superior mechanical properties compared to
untreated ones. The strong positive correlation between the datasets suggests that the properties of untreated and treated
composites are closely related and increase almost in sync with rising filler weight.
Conflict of interest
The authors do not have any form of conflict of interest in this work.
Acknowledgement
The authors are grateful tho the Niger Delta University for providing the laboratory space for this work.
References
1. Ansari, M.N.M & Ismail, H. (2009). Effect of compatibiliser on mechanical properties of feldspar & polypropylene
composites. Polym. Plast. Technology. 48(12).1295-1303
2. Ansari, S.A, Paul, E., Sommer, S. & Lieleg, C. (2016). Mediator, TATA-binding protein, and RNA polymerase II
contribute to low histone occupancy at active gene promoters in yeast. Journal of Biological Chemistry, 291(19), 9938.
3. Weinstock, J.A. (1983). Rattan: Ecological balance in a borneo rainforest Swidden. Economic Botany, 37(1) 56-68
4. Ismail, H., Muniandy, K. & Othman, N. (2012). Fatigue life, morphological studies, and thermal aging of rattan
powder-filled natural rubber composites as a function of filler loading and a silane coupling agent. BioResources, 7(1).
5. Muniandy, K., Ismail, H. & Othman, N. (2012). biodegradation, morpholgical, and ftir study of rattan powder-filled
natural rubber composites as a function of filler loading and a silane coupling agent. BioResources, 7(1).
6. Oladele, I. O. & Okoro, M. A. (2015). Development of rattan (Calamus longipinna) particulate reinforced paper pulp-
based composite for structural application using waste papers. Leonardo Journal of Science, 14(27), 75-87
7. Zaini, M. J., Fuad, M. A., Ismail, Z., Mansor, M. S. & Mustafah, J. (1996). The effect of filler content and size on the
mechanical properties of polypropylene/oil palm wood flour composites. Polymer International, 40(1), 51-55.
8. Tajvidi, M. & Ebrahimi, G. (2003). Water uptake and mechanical characteristics of natural filler–polypropylene
composites. Journal of Applied Polymer Science, 88(4), 941-946.
9. Obasi H.C. & Onuegbu G. C. (2013). Biodegradability and mechanical properties of low density polyethylene/waste
maize cob flour blends. International journal of Applied science and Engineering Research, 2, (3) 242-249.
10. Bikiaris, D. & Panayiotu, C. (1998). LDPE/Starch blends compatibilized with PE-g-MA copolymers. Journal of Applied
polymer science, 70, 1501-1521.
11. John and Thomas(2008)
12. Demir H., Atikler U., Balkose D. & Tihminlioglu, F. (2016). The effect of fibre surface treatment on the tensile and
water sorption properties of polypropylene-luffa fibre composites. Composites part A: Applied science and
manufacturing, 37(3) 447-456.
13. Yang, H. S., Kim, H. J., Park, H. J., Lee, B. J. & Hwang, T. S. (2006). Water absorption behavior and mechanical
properties of lignocellulosic filler–polyolefin bio-composites. Composite structures, 72(4), 429-437.
14. Wahab, R., Sulaiman, O., Mustafa, M. T., Sidek, S., & Mat Rasat, M. S (2016). Rattan: Propagation, Properties and
Utilization. UMK Press.
15. Mwaikambo, L. Y., & Ansell, M. P. (2002). Chemical modification of hemp, sisal, jute, and kapok fibers by
alkalization. Journal of applied polymer science, 84(12), 2222-2234.
