Comparison Of Red Maple (<i>Acer Rubrum</i> L.) And Aspen (<i>Populus Grandidentata</i> Michx) 3-Layered Flakeboards

Authors

  • Mark E. Wojcik
  • Paul R. Blankenhorn
  • Peter Labosky, Jr.

Keywords:

bending, internal bond, nail withdrawal, dimensional stability, red maple, aspen, flake-board

Abstract

Three-layered flakeboards were fabricated using long and short flakes of red maple (Acer rubrum L.) and aspen (Populus grandidentata Michx). Panels were fabricated using three layers of a single species or face layers of a single species with a core layer of the other species. Static bending, internal bond, and nail withdrawal values indicated that red maple and aspen boards for the most part were comparable. A mixed species board with aspen in the face layers and red maple in the core layer had some of the highest static bending values. Dimensional stability values were acceptable among all boards with the mixed species boards producing some of the lowest values. Red maple 3-layered flakeboards were similar to aspen 3-layered boards and it appeared that red maple and aspen may be mixed to produce quality 3-layered flakeboards.

References

American Society For Testing And Materials. 1986. Standard methods of evaluating the properties of wood base fiber and particle panel materials. ASTM D 1037-78.nBrumbaugh, J. 1960. Effect of flake dimensions on properties of particleboards. Forest Prod. J. 10(5):243-246.nCarll, C. 1986. Wood particleboard and flakeboard types, grades, and uses. USDA Forest Service, Forest Products Laboratory, General Technical Report FPL-GTR-53. Pp. 8.nGeimer, R. L. 1976. Flake alignment in particleboard as affected by machine variables and particle geometry. USDA Forest Service Research Report 275, Forest Products Laboratory, Madison, WI.nGeimer, R. L, W. H. Montrey, and W. F. Lehmann. 1975. Effects of layer characteristics on the properties of three-layer particleboard. Forest Prod. J. 25(3): 19-29.nHse, Y. H. 1975. Properties of flakeboards from hardwoods growing on southern pine sites. Forest Prod. J. 25(3):48-53.nJackowski, J. A., and S. J. Smulski. 1988. Isocyanate adhesive as a binder for red maple flakeboard. Forest Prod. J. 38(2):49-50.nKelly, N. W., and E. W. Price. 1985. Effect of species and panel density on durability of structural flakeboard. Forest Prod. J. 35(2):39-44.nKjeser, J., and E. F. Steck. 1978. The influence of flake orientation on the MOR and MOE of strandboard. Proceedings of the Washington State University Particleboard Symposium, No. 12. Pullman, WA.nKrisnabamung, W. 1974. Strength and dimensional stability of electrically oriented particleboard from western red cedar mill waste. M.S. Thesis, University of Idaho, Moscow, ID.nKuklewski, K. N., P. R. Blankenhorn, and L. E. Rishel. 1985. Comparison of selected physical and mechanical properties of red maple and aspen flakeboard. Wood Fiber Sci. 17(1):11-21.nMaloney, T. W. 1977. Modern particleboard and dry-processing fiberboard manufacturing. Miller Freeman Publishers, San Francisco, CA. 672 pp.nPrice, E. W. 1976. Determining tensile properties of sweetgum veneer flakes. Forest Prod. J. 26(10):50-53.nPrice, E. W, and C. Y. Hse. 1983. Bottomland hardwoods for structural flakeboards. Forest Prod. J. 33(11/12):33-40.nSpringate, N. C. 1980. The use of different species in the production of waferboard. Pages 119-124 in Canadian Waferboard Symposium. Forintek Canada Corp. Special Publication SP505E, Ottawa, Canada.n

Downloads

Published

2007-06-22

Issue

Number 3 / July 1989

Section

Research Contributions

License

The copyright of an article published in Wood and Fiber Science is transferred to the Society of Wood Science and Technology (for U. S. Government employees: to the extent transferable), effective if and when the article is accepted for publication. This transfer grants the Society of Wood Science and Technology permission to republish all or any part of the article in any form, e.g., reprints for sale, microfiche, proceedings, etc. However, the authors reserve the following as set forth in the Copyright Law:

1. All proprietary rights other than copyright, such as patent rights.

2. The right to grant or refuse permission to third parties to republish all or part of the article or translations thereof. In the case of whole articles, such third parties must obtain Society of Wood Science and Technology written permission as well. However, the Society may grant rights with respect to Journal issues as a whole.

3. The right to use all or part of this article in future works of their own, such as lectures, press releases, reviews, text books, or reprint books.