This article was downloaded by: [University of California, San Francisco]

On: 14 December 2014, At: 07:34

Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,
37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

The Journal of The Textile Institute

Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tjti20

A comparative study on natural fibre density

measurement
a a b b
M. Truong , W. Zhong , S. Boyko & M. Alcock
a
Department of Textile Sciences , University of Manitoba , Winnipeg, MB, Canada
b
Composite Innovation Centre Manitoba Inc. , Winnipeg, MB, Canada
Published online: 03 Aug 2009.

To cite this article: M. Truong , W. Zhong , S. Boyko & M. Alcock (2009) A comparative study on natural fibre density
measurement, The Journal of The Textile Institute, 100:6, 525-529, DOI: 10.1080/00405000801997595

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00405000801997595

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained
in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no
representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the
Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and
are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and
should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for
any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever
or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of
the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic
reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any
form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://
www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
 The Journal of The Textile Institute
Vol. 100, No. 6, August 2009, 525–529

A comparative study on natural fibre density measurement

M. Truonga , W. Zhonga∗ , S. Boykob and M. Alcockb
a
Department of Textile Sciences, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada; b Composite Innovation Centre Manitoba Inc.,
Winnipeg, MB, Canada

This is a study for the comparison of existing test methods for measuring the density of natural fibres to be used as
reinforcement in biocomposite materials. Normally, any such method is evaluated by referring to its accuracy, cost, speed
Downloaded by [University of California, San Francisco] at 07:34 14 December 2014

of test result (i.e. how quick a method is to give the result), and whether it is convenient and safe to use. Through literature
review, we identified five such methods: (1) diameter and linear density, (2) Archimedes, (3) helium pycnometry, (4) gradient
column and (5) liquid pycnometry. The same sample (oilseed flax fibres) was tried using these methods to measure its density.
As a result of the study, two methods are recommended: Archimedes (with the use of canola oil as immersion fluid) and the
helium pycnometry. The former was found to be simple, quick to give the result and incur lower cost, and therefore promising
for general use in measuring the density of natural fibre, but the latter, although capable of providing more repeatable results,
be at a much higher cost.
Keywords: flax fibres; natural fibres; density; composite materials

Introduction reinforcement (fibre), dC the density of the composite, dM

There has been a growing urgency to develop new bio-
based composite materials for their advantages of being
renewable, recyclable, sustainable and ecoefficient. Natural
fibre reinforced composites are emerging as a viable al-
ternative to glass fiber reinforced composites especially in
automotive parts and building materials (Goutianos, Peijs,
Nystrom, & Skrifvars, 2006; Magurno, 1999; Mohanty,
Misra, & Drzal, 2002). Bast fibres, including flax, hemp,
coil and jute fibres are among the most popular natural fi-
bres in such applications because of their high stiffness and
strength.
Fibre and void volume fractions are important pa-
rameters in evaluating the quality of composite materials,
whereas accurate fibre and void volume fraction evaluations
are based on the knowledge of fiber density, as represented
in the equations according to ASTM D3171 (1990) and
ASTM D2734 (1994):
Fibre volume in a composite (% )

cost, how quick a method is to give the result, and whether
WR dR
=
− 100
WC dC
Void content in a composite (% )
 
R r
= 100 − dC + (2)
dM dR
where WR is the weight of the reinforcement (fibre), WC
the weight of the composite specimen, dR the density of the
the density of matrix, R the weight percent matrix in the
composite and r the weight percent reinforcement (fibre) in
the composite.
However, there is currently no standard test method
for natural fibre density in the industry. The purpose of
this study is, therefore, to recommend an appropriate test
method for the measurement of natural fibre density (Li,
Mai, & Ye, 2000; Soykeabkaew, Supaphol, & Rujiravanit,
2004; Wool et al., 2002).
Five density test methods used for high-modulus fi-
bres or plastics were found through a review of academic
literature journals and standardised tests (e.g. ASTM).
They are diameter/linear density (Soykeabkaew et al.,
2004), Archimedes (ASTM-D3800–99, 2005), helium py-
cnometry (Rude, Strait, & Ruhala, 2000), gradient col-
umn (ASTM-1505–03, 2005) and liquid pycnometry (Rude
et al., 2000). Of these, three were chosen for this study: di-
ameter/linear density, Archimedes and helium pycnometry.
They were compared by referring to the quality of results,
it is convenient and safe to use.
(1)
Materials and methods
Oilseed flax fibres were used in the present study, as it is one
of the most frequently used bast fibres in the development
of natural fibre reinforced composites. Prior to testing, the
flax fibre sample was conditioned in an oven at 60◦ C until
the moisture content was reduced to below 5%. The fibre

∗
Corresponding author. Email: zhong@cc.umanitoba.ca
ISSN 0040-5000 print / ISSN 1754-2340 online
Copyright 
C 2009 The Textile Institute
DOI: 10.1080/00405000801997595
http://www.informaworld.com
 526 M. Truong et al.
was dried to ensure that all specimens to be tested were at
a consistent moisture level. The flax fibres were then kept
in sealed specimen bags so that they would remain at a
constant moisture level during the test.
Method 1: linear density and diameter calculation
(Soykeabkaew et al., 2004)
The specimen, a long-single fibre, was cut into small
splices, placed onto a microscope slide, and projected onto
a screen through the microscope. Its diameter was mea-
sured using a ruler in millimetres. Linear density was cal-
culated by measurement of the masses and lengths of the
Downloaded by [University of California, San Francisco] at 07:34 14 December 2014
specimens tested. Namely, 100 fibres were tested to deter-
mine an average diameter and 10 fibres to determine the
average linear density. The average linear density and di-
ameter were used to calculate the volume density of the
fibre ρ f (Arbelaiz et al., 2005; ASTM-D1577–01, 2005;
ASTM–D2130, 2005; Soykeabkaew, 2004):
M
ρf = πd 2
(3)
4
l composed of liquids of different densities. The specimen is
where M is the mass of a fibre specimen, d the average
diameter, and l the length of a fibre specimen.
Method 2: Archimedes (buoyancy)
The sample, a bundle of fibres, was weighed in air and
then in a liquid that was used to wet the sample and was
smaller in density than the sample. The difference of the
two media was the buoyancy force. The weighing process
was conducted on an analytical balance with a resolution of
0.0001g, and was adapted for suspension weighing through
a stainless steel suspension wire approximately 0.4 mm
in diameter. The buoyancy force was converted to sample
volume by dividing the liquid density. The sample density
ρ f was acquired by dividing sample weight in air with
sample volume (ASTM-D3800–99, 2005):
(M3 − M1 ) ρl
ρf = (4)
((M3 − M1 ) − (M4 − M2 ))
where ρ l is the density of liquid, M1 weight of suspension
wire in air, M2 the weight of suspension wire in liquid (to
immersion point), M3 the weight of suspension wire plus
item whose density was to be determined in air and M4
weight of suspension wire plus item whose density was to
be determined in liquid.
The immersion liquids tried in this study were canola
oil, water, ethanol, methanol, acetone and glycerol. Seven
fibre samples were tested for each immersion liquid.
Method 3: helium pycnometry (Rude et al., 2000)
Specimen for this test was also a bundle of fibres, and 10
samples were tested to give an averaged value. This test
method was similar to the Archimedes method, but was
applied using a gas medium rather than a liquid one. He-
lium gas was used to test the fibre volume through what
was called the helium gas pycnometer. A known volume
of helium gas was contained in the pycnometer’s refer-
ence cell. During a test, the gas was released slowly from
the reference cell into the sample cell where the fibres were
located. The pressure of the helium gas that remained in
the reference container was used to determine the volume
of the fibre sample. Mass of the sample was measured on
a balance, and the density of the fibre was determined by
dividing the mass by the volume (Rude et al., 2000).
Method 4: gradient column (ASTM-1505–03,
2005)
ASTM 1505–03 (2005) is usually used. In such a test, den-
sity of the specimen (a bundle of fibres) must be matched
with that of the liquid. The apparatus used is a column
submerged in the column, and the closest calibrated glass
float serves to determine the density of the sample. No way
is known to directly measure the weight or volume of the
fibre sample. Since we have to depend on the closest cal-
ibrated glass float to tell the density of the sample tested,
accuracy of the test has to be questionable. In addition, it re-
quires costly equipment developed specifically for the type
of specimens to be tested. Thus the test was not selected in
this study.
Method 5: liquid pycnometry (Rude et al., 2000)
This test method is similar to the Archimedes and helium
pycnometry methods, and specimen used is also a fibre
bundle. There is one thing in particular, however, the test
specimen must be less dense than the test fluid. Since the
fibre sample is weighted in air and then placed into a liquid
pycnometer, this method permits a direct measurement of
the fibre sample’s volume (namely, the liquid that is dis-
placed in the pycnometer gives a reading of the sample
volume). Then density of the fibre is calculated by the mass
and volume. This test method was not chosen in the present
study because the choice of test fluids is limited by the
density of the flax fibres, and it is similar to other selected
methods.
Results and discussion
Trial results for the three chosen test methods are sum-
marised in the appendix, and performances of these meth-
ods are summarised in Table A1. The tests were timed to
acquire the average time to conduct each test and allow
 The Journal of The Textile Institute
Figure 1. Mean and standard deviation of fibre density from
Downloaded by [University of California, San Francisco] at 07:34 14 December 2014
different tests.
equipment set-up and calibration. A detailed comparison
of timing and equipment capital costs are given in Table
A2. For statistical analysis of the data collected, the average
and standard deviation were used. The results are presented
graphically in Figure 1. To assess the accuracy of each test,
results were compared to the published values of flax fi-
bre density, which were found to range from 1.4 g/cm3 to
1.6 g/cm3 (ASTM-D276, 2005; Collier & Tortora, 2001).
It should be noted that no experimental results were
available for the Archimedes test using glycerol. Owing to
the high viscosity of the liquid, the fibre was not easily
immersed, which caused difficulty in conducting the test
according to the prescribed directions. Although an attempt
was made, reliable readings were not obtained.
The linear density and diameter calculation method
Strength of this test method is that it is safe to conduct,
as there are no chemicals involved. No specific protective
equipment is required. It is also an easy and simple test to
set up, and the results are calculated by simple equations.
The amount of worker training required to conduct this test
would be minimal. The capital cost of the equipment for this
test method was lower than the helium pycnometry method
and comparable to the cost for the Archimedes method. The
consumables required to conduct the test, such as slides,
cover slips and distilled water, are inexpensive and readily
available in a standard laboratory. The main weakness of
this test method is that it gives poor accuracy compared
to the published values for flax fibre density, and it is by
far the slowest test, requiring approximately 2 h for the
results to come out, as this method recommends testing
100 fibres to determine an average diameter and 10 fibres
to determine the average linear density. There is also a large
variation in the density results compared to the other two
test methods. This variation is caused by the variation in
the diameter along the fibre length as well as irregularity in
cross-sectional shape of natural fibres.
527
The Archimedes method
Strength of this method is that the equipment is easy to
set up and dissemble, and simple equations can be used
to calculate the density of the fibre. In addition, the test
apparatus is the least expensive, and the consumables re-
quired are the immersion fluids, which are also of low cost.
Furthermore, this test requires the least amount of time to
conduct. The accuracy and repeatability of measurements
are highly dependent on the immersion fluid used. Water
and ethanol provide the poorest results with respect to these
criteria, whereas canola oil gives the best, showing excellent
agreement with published values for flax fibre density in the
range of 1.4–1.6 g/cm3 . Another advantage of the canola
oil is that it is harmless and does not create any health and
safety risks. But some of the alternative chemicals that are
used for this test, such as ethanol, acetone and methanol,
may pose a slight health risk and require worker protection
from harmful vapours.
A recommendation regarding this test is to select a fluid
with low viscosity and surface tension, because it coats the
fibre well, and it allows the fibre to sink into the fluid and
be easily immersed.
The helium pycnometry method
Measurements from this test method show excellent agree-
ment with published values for flax fibre density in the range
of 1.4–1.6 g/cm3 . This method also provides the most re-
peatable measurements for the density of the fibres as shown
by the small standard deviation of the results. Its strength is
that there are no harmful chemicals used to conduct the test,
and it is a quick and easy test procedure for any operator
who has become familiar with the equipment (this means,
then, that some worker training is required). Disadvantage
of this test method is that it requires specialised equipment.
That is, although apparatuses used in other tests may have
alternative uses within a laboratory, the helium pycnometry
equipment is designed specifically for density testing. This
equipment is also more expensive than apparatuses for the
other tests.
Conclusion
This study was conducted to compare existing test meth-
ods for measuring the density of natural fibres to be used
as reinforcement in bio-composite materials. Five methods
were identified through a literature review. And three out
of five were used in the present study. They are the diame-
ter and linear density, Archimedes, and helium pycometry.
Trials were conducted on a single sample of oilseed flax
fibres using the three methods to measure fibre density. The
various methods were evaluated by referring to accuracy,
cost, how quick a method is to give the result, and whether
it is convenient and safe to perform.
 528 M. Truong et al.

As a result of the work, we are now in a position to favour
the Archimedes method (with canola oil as immersion fluid)
and the helium pycnometry method, due to their better, com-
parable accuracy, and to the fact that no harmful chemicals
are involved in them. When repeatability is considered, the
helium pycnometry test is still more preferable because
it provides a significantly lower variation between results.
However, the Archimedes test is less expensive in terms
of start-up costs, as indicated by requirements for capital
equipment and worker training. Overall, while the canola oil
Archimedes test is a simple, quick and inexpensive method
for general use in measuring the density of natural fibres, the
helium pycnometry method is capable of providing higher
quality results. This method would be preferred where fac-
Downloaded by [University of California, San Francisco] at 07:34 14 December 2014
ASTM-D1577–01. (2005). Standard test method for linear density
of textile fibers. ASTM International, West Conshohocken,
PA.
ASTM-D2130. (2005). Standard test method for diam-
eter of wool and other animal fibers by micropro-
jection. ASTM International, West Conshohocken,
PA.
ASTM-D2734–94. (1994). Standard test method for void
content of reinforced plastics. ASTM International, West
Conshohocken, PA.
ASTM-D3171–76. (1990). Standard test methods for fibre
content of resin matrix composites by matrix digestion.
ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA.
ASTM-D3800–99. (2005). Standard test method for den-
sity of high-modulus fibers, ASTM International, West
Conshohocken, PA.

Collier, B.J., & Tortora, P.G. (2001). Understanding textiles.

tors such as stringent demands for accuracy or a high vol-
ume of testing exist to justify the additional cost.
Acknowledgement
We should like to indicate our gratefulness to the Department of
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, and Composite Innovation
Centre Manitoba Inc (CIC), for the support they provided us in
the study.
References
AATCC Test Method 20-2005. (2006). Fibre analysis: Qualita-
tive, in AATCC Technical Manual, American Association of
Textile Chemists and Colorists, Research Triangle Park, NC.
Arbelaiz, A. Fernandez, B., Cantero, G. Llano-Ponte, R., Valea,
A., & Mondragon, I. (2005). Mechanical properties of flax fi-
bre/polypropylene composites. Influence of fibre/matrix mod-
ification and glass fibre hybridization. Composites A, 36,
1637–1644.
ASTM-1505–03. (2005). Standard test methods for density
of plastics by the density-gradient technique. ASTM
International, West Conshohocken, PA.
ASTM-D276. (2005). Standard test methods for identification of
fibres in textiles. ASTM International, West Conshohocken,
PA.
Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Goutianos, S., Peijs, T., Nystrom, B., & Skrifvars, M. (2006).
Development of flax fibre based textile reinforcements for
composite applications. Application of Composite Materials,
13, 199–215.
Li, Y., Mai, Y.W., & Ye, L. (2000). Sisal fibre and its composites:
A review of recent developments. Composite Science and
Technology, 60, 2037–2055.
Magurno, A. (1999). Vegetable fibres in automotive interior
components. Die Angewandte Makromolekulare Chemie,
272, 99–107.
Mohanty, A.K., Misra, M., & Drzal, L.T. (2002). Sustainable
bio-composites from renewable resources: Opportunities and
challenges in the green materials world. Journal of Polymers
and the Environment, 10, 19–26.
Rude, T.J. Strait, L.H., & Ruhala, L.A. (2000). Measurement of
fiber density by helium pycnometry. Journal of Composite
Materials, 34, 1948–1958.
Soykeabkaew, N., Supaphol, P., & Rujiravanit, R. (2004). Prepa-
ration and characterization of jute- and flax-reinforced starch-
based composite foams. Carbohydrate Polymers, 58, 53–
63.
Wool, R.P., Khot, S.N., La Scala, J.J., Bunker, S.P., Lu, J.,
Thielemans W., et al. (2002). Affordable composites and
plastics from renewable resources: Part II: Manufacture
of composites. American Chemical Society, 823, 205–
224.

Appendix

Table A1. Summary of experiments.

Ease Speed of Health

Test methods Accuracya Repeatability of use test result and safety Cost

Diameter/linear density Poor Poor Excellent Poor Excellent Good

Archimedes immersion fluid methanol Fair Fair Excellent Good Fair Good
Acetone Poor Fair Excellent Good Fair Good
Canola oil Excellent Good Excellent Good Excellent Good
Water Poor Poor Excellent Good Excellent Good
Ethanol Poor Poor Excellent Good Fair Good
Helium pycnometry Poor Excellent Good Good Excellent Fair
a The accuracy is rated according to comparison to the published results of 1.4–1.6 g/cm3 (AATCC, 2006; Arbelaiz et al., 2005; ASTM-D276, 2005;
Collier & Tortora, 2001).
 The Journal of The Textile Institute 529

Table A2. Timing and costs comparisons.

Timing (minutes)
Samples Set up and
Test methods needed Test calibration Equipment Costa

Diameter/linear density 100/10 120 20 Micro projector $800.00

Balance $3,000.00
Ruler $1.00
Razor blades $0.50
Total $3,801.50
Archimedes 7 45 20 Density determination $841.55
kit
Blance $2,500.00
Vacuum desiccator $31.00
Downloaded by [University of California, San Francisco] at 07:34 14 December 2014

and pump
Total $3,372.55
Helium pycnometry 10 35 35 Pycnometer $6,490.00
Gas regulator $575.00
Balance $2,500.00
Total $9,565.00
a Quoted in Canadian Dollars.