View
3
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
The Potential of Urban Wood Residues in
Particleboard Production
Ahmad Jahan Latibari*Department of Wood and Paper Science, Karaj
Branch, Islamic Azad University,
Fardad GolbabaeiAbolfazl Kargarfard
Wood and Products Research Division, Institute of Forests and Rangeland, Tehran, Iran
INTRODUCTION
Introduction
The main objective of the early development of theparticleboard production was the utilization of theresidues generated in different wood working operations.The unique characteristics of particleboard opened its wayinto various applications and generated interest amongdifferent consumer sectors especially cabinet and homefurniture
Introduction
Kiwi tree residues (Nemli et al. 2003), tea plants residues(Shi et al. 2006) and kenaf ( Xu et al. 2004 andKalaycioglu and Nemli 2006) were investigated as thepotential sources of raw material for board production.Even though kenaf was used to reduce the resinconsumption, but this procedure required theproduction of higher density boards which is notpossible on the stand point of industrial production (Xuet al. 2004).
Introduction
Attention has been focused on the reduction of the finalboard density as the possible way to reduce the rawmaterial requirements. Wang and Sun (2002) utilizedwheat straw and corn stalks to produce board of therequired quality at lower density. However, the need touse isocyanate resin has limited the application of suchmaterial. Murathan et al. (2007) selected the waste cartonboards as the potential raw material for board production,but the thickness of the boards was limited.
Introduction
The production of particleboard using wood bark (Blanchetet al., 1998), pine tree needles (Nemli et al., 2008) , pinetree cones ( Buyuksari et al. 2010) and bark and stem ofthe coffee branches ( Bekalo and Reinhardt 2010) havebeen investigated.
Introduction
The other alternative raw material investigated forparticleboard production was urban and orchard treepruning which is available in urban area and fruit treeplantations (Enayeti et al. 2008)
Plantanus orientalis
Plantanus orientalis
Plantanus orientalis
Pinus eldarica
Objectives
The severe shortage of wood raw material has forced theinvestigators to search and use the alternative,uncommon and unconventional wood supply especiallyurban wood residues. The availability of such wood inurban areas and limitations on wood supply necessitatedthe investigation to identify the suitability of suchmaterial for particleboard production. This was theobjective of our research.
Materials and Methods
Material
Pine and sycamore branches were collected from urban treepruning in the city of Karaj and the grape tree pruning wascollected from grape tree yard in Takestan, Ghazvin.
Mixed hardwood particles were obtained from Iran ChoubParticleboard plant located in the city of Ghazvin. Theparticles were used as received.
Material
Urea-formaldehyde resin was purchased from FarsChemical Company resin plant, Shiraz. Thecharacteristic of the resin was as follow: gel time; 47seconds (Bison Cup), density; 1.285, solid content;63%, pH; 7.5 and viscosity; 45 seconds.
Hardener; industrial grade ammonium chloride wasused
Methods
Particle Preparation
pH and Buffering Capacity and Bulk Density Measurement
Board Making and Testing
Results and Discussion
0
5
10
15
20
25
IN KA CN KC IC IK IA
MO
R (
MP
a)Adhesive
10%
11%
12%
IN: Mixed Hard Wood (MHW);
KA: Pine wood;
CN: Sycamore wood;
KC: 50% Sycamore:50% Pine;
IC: 50% MHW:50% Sycamore,
IK: 50% MHW:50% Pine;
IA: 50% MHW:50% Grape tree residues
IN: Mixed Hard Wood (MHW);
KA: Pine wood;
CN: Sycamore wood;
KC: 50% Sycamore:50% Pine;
IC: 50% MHW:50% Sycamore,
IK: 50% MHW:50% Pine;
IA: 50% MHW:50% Grape tree residues
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
IN KA CN KC IC IK IA
MO
E (
mP
a)Adhesive
10%
11%
12%
IN: Mixed Hard Wood (MHW);
KA: Pine wood;
CN: Sycamore wood;
KC: 50% Sycamore:50% Pine;
IC: 50% MHW:50% Sycamore,
IK: 50% MHW:50% Pine;
IA: 50% MHW:50% Grape tree residues
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
IN KA CN KC IC IK IA
IB (
mP
a)
Adhesive
10%
11%
12%
IN: Mixed Hard Wood (MHW);
KA: Pine wood;
CN: Sycamore wood;
KC: 50% Sycamore:50% Pine;
IC: 50% MHW:50% Sycamore,
IK: 50% MHW:50% Pine;
IA: 50% MHW:50% Grape tree residues
0
5
10
15
20
25
IN KA CN KC IC IK IA
TS
2h (
%) Adhesive
10%
11%
12%
IN: Mixed Hard Wood (MHW);
KA: Pine wood;
CN: Sycamore wood;
KC: 50% Sycamore:50% Pine;
IC: 50% MHW:50% Sycamore,
IK: 50% MHW:50% Pine;
IA: 50% MHW:50% Grape tree residues
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
IN KA CN KC IC IK IA
TS
24
h (
%)
Adhesive
10%11%12%
IN: Mixed Hard Wood (MHW);
KA: Pine wood;
CN: Sycamore wood;
KC: 50% Sycamore:50% Pine;
IC: 50% MHW:50% Sycamore,
IK: 50% MHW:50% Pine;
IA: 50% MHW:50% Grape tree residues
0
20
40
60
80
100
IN KA CN KC IC IK IA
WA
2h
(%
) Adhesive10%11%12%
IN: Mixed Hard Wood (MHW);
KA: Pine wood;
CN: Sycamore wood;
KC: 50% Sycamore:50% Pine;
IC: 50% MHW:50% Sycamore,
IK: 50% MHW:50% Pine;
IA: 50% MHW:50% Grape tree residues
0
20
40
60
80
100
IN KA CN KC IC IK IA
WA
24
h (
%)
Adhesive
10%
11%
12%
Conclusion
We investigated the impact of wood raw material type and theresin dosage on the strength and thickness swelling of thelaboratory particleboard. The flexural strength (MOR) of theboards ranged from the lowest value of 11.21 MPa to thehighest value of 21.43 MPa. Lower density pine woodproduced strongest boards. However, other raw material andthe combination of the raw material also produced suitableboards. Modulus of elasticity (MOE) followed the same trendas MOR. Mixed hardwood particles produced highest internalbonding, but the internal bonding of the boards producedusing other raw material was more than the requirements ofthe EN.
The results revealed that any combination of different urban andorchard tree residues can be utilized in particleboardproduction with the characteristics fulfilling the requirementsof EN standard.
Thank You
Any Question Or Comment
Recommended