Mechanical Characterization of Silicone Rubber with Quail Eggshells as Bio-Based Filler

Article Preview

Abstract:

The incorporation of natural fillers like eggshells in polymers has gain attention due to their potential capability to enhance some properties while providing possible cost savings. In this paper, quail eggshells were used as bio-based filler in silicone rubber and their effects on the mechanical properties were investigated. For the composite manufacturing, samples containing 4.8 wt.% (5 phr), 9.1 wt.% (10 phr) and 13 wt.% (15 phr) of crushed quail eggshells were manually prepared. The mechanical characterization tests considered are compression, tensile and hardness. Based from the results, the sample with 4.8 wt.% filler achieved the highest compressive strength of 2.79 MPa and hardness of 53.3 which correspond to improvements of about 11 % and 6 % as compared to the plain rubber, respectively. These enhancements can be associated with the good dispersion of the filler at lower loading. However, higher filler contents resulted to a decrease in mechanical properties which could be linked to the possible agglomeration of crushed eggshells and weak filler to matrix interaction caused by lack of surface treatment. Nevertheless, the improvements attained by adding quail eggshells at lower percentage in rubber can still make it an alternative filler to consider.

You might also be interested in these eBooks

Info:

Periodical:

Pages:

73-78

Citation:

Online since:

May 2026

Export:

Price:

Permissions CCC:

Permissions PLS:

Сopyright:

© 2026 Trans Tech Publications Ltd. All Rights Reserved

Share:

Citation:

* - Corresponding Author

[1] M.M. Kabir, R. Mustak and M.M.H. Sadik: Hybrid Advances Vol. 10 (2025), 100448.

Google Scholar

[2] Z. Tabassum, M. Girdhar, A. Anand, N. Kumari, B. Sood, T. Malik, A. Kumar and A. Mohan: Materials Advances Vol. 6 (2024), pp.527-546.

DOI: 10.1039/d4ma01043d

Google Scholar

[3] Y. Munusamy and M. Kchaou: Ain Shams Engineering Journal Vol. 14 (2023), 102512.

Google Scholar

[4] A.A. Sivakumar, S. Sankarapandian, S. Avudaiappan and E.I. Saavedra Flores: Materials Vol. 15 (2022), 9044.

Google Scholar

[5] K. Skórczewska, K. Lewandowski, P. Szewczykowski, S. Wilczewski, J. Szulc, P. Stopa and P. Nowakowska: Polymers 14 (2022), 4372.

DOI: 10.3390/polym14204372

Google Scholar

[6] A. Sowińska-Baranowska and M. Maciejewska: Materials Vol. 16 (2023), 2988.

Google Scholar

[7] O. Awogbemi, D.V.V. Kallon and V.S. Aigbodion: Journal of Renewable Materials Vol. 10 (2022), pp.2217-2246.

Google Scholar

[8] T. Venkategowda, P.R. Anilkumar and S. Premkumar: Journal of Manufacturing Engineering 20 (2025), pp.61-66.

Google Scholar

[9] J.D. Lopena, J.G.Y. Onia, T.D. Bautista, A.R. Domingo, R.C.M. Romulo and X.B.S. Yebes: Proceedings on Engineering Sciences Vol. 7 (2025), pp.1443-1452.

DOI: 10.24874/pes07.03.006

Google Scholar

[10] S. Owuamanam, M. Soleimani and D.E. Cree: Applied Mechanics Vol. 2 (2021), pp.694-713.

Google Scholar

[11] T. Ghabeer, R. Dweiri and S. Al-Khateeb: Journal of Reinforced Plastics and Composites Vol. 32 (2013), pp.402-409.

DOI: 10.1177/0731684412470015

Google Scholar

[12] Y.S. Perera, M. Naaib, N. Ariyasinghe and C. Abeykoon: Composites Part C: Open Access Vol. 16 (2025), 100561.

DOI: 10.1016/j.jcomc.2025.100561

Google Scholar

[13] G. Ramesh, D. Jayabalakrishnan and C. Rameshkumar: Journal of Optoelectronics and Biomedical Materials Vol. 10 (2018), pp.21-28.

Google Scholar