Effect of Strand Geometry and Wood Species on Strandboard Mechanical Properties
Keywords:Oriented strand lumber, flexural properties, compressive properties, internal bond, paper birch, trembling aspen
AbstractThis study compared the performance of strandboards made from trembling aspen, a lowdensity hardwood species, with strandboards made from paper birch, a medium-density hardwood species. Strands were cut into three different lengths (78, 105, and 142 mm) and two thicknesses (0.55 and 0.75 mm) to compare the impact of species, strand geometry, specific surface, and slenderness ratio. Internal bond (IB), modulus of elasticity (MOE), and modulus of rupture (MOR) for flatwise and edgewise bending, compressive strength, and stiffness were all determined. Both species performed equally well in IB (0.73 MPa for both species combined). The highest MOE and MOR values in flatwise and edgewise bending were obtained for long, thin strands and were significantly lower for birch than for aspen panels (flatwise: 13.6 GPa and 99.2 MPa for aspen and 12.1 GPa and 85.5 MPa for birch; edgewise: 13.5 GPa and 66.3 MPa for aspen and 13.2 GPa and 65.7 MPa for birch). Short aspen strands resulted in the highest compressive properties, slightly higher than those of short birch strands (aspen: compressive strength 10.4 MPa and stiffness 1.22 GPa; birch: 10.8 MPa and 2.25 GPa, respectively). Strand length must therefore be a compromise between the need for high bending properties provided by long strands and the need for high compressive properties provided by short strands.
ASTM. (2008a) Standard test methods for direct moisture content measurement for wood and wood-based materials. D 4442-07. American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, PA.nASTM. (2008b) Standard test methods for evaluating properties of wood-based fiber and particle panel materials. D 1037-06a. American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, PA.nASTM. (2008c) Standard specification for evaluation of structural composite lumber products. D 5456-07. American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, PA.nASTM. (2008d) Standard test methods of static tests of lumber in structural sizes. D 198-05a. American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, PA.nBarnes D (1988) Parallam—A new wood product. Invention and development to the pilot scale stage. In Proc Marcus Wallenberg Symposium, Söderham, Sweden.nBarnes D (2000) An integrated model of the effect of processing parameters on the strength properties of oriented strand wood products. Forest Prod J 50(11/12):33-42.nBarnes D (2001) A model of the effect of strand length and strand thickness on the strength properties of oriented wood composites. Forest Prod J 51(2):36-46.nBeck K, Cloutier A, Salenikovich A, Beauregard R (2009) Comparison of mechanical properties of oriented strand board made from trembling aspen and paper birch. Holz Roh Werkst. In press.nCSA. (1993) Standards on OSB and waferboard. CSA O437 Series-93. Canadian Standards Association.nCSA. (2005) Engineering design in wood. CSA O86. Canadian Standards Association.nChen SG, Du CG, Wellwood R (2008) Analysis of strand characteristics and alignment of commercial OSB panels. Forest Prod J 58(6):94-98.nChirasatitsin S, Prasertsan S, Wisutmethangoon W, Kyokong B (2005) Mechanical properties of rubberwood oriented strand lumber (OSL): The effect of strand length. Songklanakarin J Sci Technol27(5):1047-1055.nDai CP, Yu CM, Zhou C (2007) Theoretical modeling of bonding characteristics and performance of wood composites. Part I. Inter-element contact. Wood Fiber Sci 39(1):48-55.niLevel. (2008) iLevel Trus Joist® beam, header, and column specifier's guide. TJ-9500. http://www.ilevel.com/literature/TJ-9500.pdf'>http://www.ilevel.com/literature/TJ-9500.pdfnISO. (1975) International standard ISO 3131 wood—Determination of density for physical and mechanical tests. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland.nJessome AP (1977) Strength and related properties of woods grown in Canada. Eastern Forest Products Laboratory, Ottawa, Canada.nMarra AA (1992) Technology of wood bonding: Principles in practice. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, NY.nMeyers KL (2001) Impact of strand geometry and orientation on mechanical properties of strand composites. MS thesis, Washington State University.nMoslemi AA (1974) Particleboard. Volume 1: Materials. Southern Illinois University Press.nPost PW (1958) Effect of particle geometry and resin content on bending strength of oak flake board. Forest Prod J 8(10):317-322.nRice JT (1984) Compaction ratio and resin coverage effects on properties of thick, phenol-bonded flakeboard. Pages 103-118 in Price EP, ed. Proc a Workshop on the Durability of Structural Panels. General Technical Report SO-53. USDA Forest Service, Southern Forest Experimental Station, Pensacola, FL.nSuchsland O (1968) Particle-board from Southern Pine. So Lumberman 15:139-144.nUN (2007) Forest Products Annual Market Review, 2006 - 2007. United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization. 174 pp.nWang KY, Lam F (1999) Quadratic RSM models of processing parameters for three-layer oriented flakeboards. Wood Fiber Sci 31(2):173-186.nWang SQ, Winistorfer PM, Moschler WW, Helton CC (2000) Hot pressing of oriented strandboard by step closure. Forest Prod J 50(3):28-34.nWeight SW, Yadama V (2008a) Manufacture of laminated strand veneer (LSV) composite. Part 1: Optimization and characterization of thin strand veneers. Holzforschung 62(6):718-724.nWeight SW, Yadama V (2008b) Manufacture of laminated strand veneer (LSV) composite. Part 2. Elastic and strength properties of laminate of thin strand veneers. Holzforschung 62(6):725-730.n
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.