Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Solid Wood Panel Manufacturing Using Low Quality Materials

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Advances in Sustainable and Competitive Manufacturing Systems

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Mechanical Engineering ((LNME))

  • 1996 Accesses

Abstract

Low-value hardwoods are not used to its full potential because they possess a challenging economic proposition to entrepreneurs in search of profit. In particular, high extraction and processing costs for low-value and underutilized hardwoods are not offset by products that carry a high enough value to customers to assure favorable economics. Thus, the low-value biomass is not used sufficiently in U.S. forests to support sustainable quality forest management practices. Furthermore, economic opportunities are lost for rural economies and forest landowners. The main purpose of the project described is to design the manufacture of a high value product from low-value hardwood timber achieving positive economics, thereby assuring the efficient and effective use of the resource. In particular, the project assesses the markets and the technical potential for manufacturing solid, finger-jointed edge-glued hardwood panels from low-value hardwoods. In fact, the technical feasibility of manufacturing edge-glued panels has been proven and is a major product of wood components manufacturers in the U.S. However, the use of low-value hardwoods for this purpose has not received much attention. This study intends to fill this gap by conducting an exhaustive analysis of secondary sources to assess raw material availability for such panels from low-value hardwoods. Also, appropriate processing routes to achieve competitive target prices while assuring positive economics are investigated.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 259.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 329.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    A board foot describes a volume of one foot by one foot by one inch.

  2. 2.

    A cord describes a volume of stacked wood 4 feet high, 8 feet long, and 4 feet deep.

  3. 3.

    Yield is the surface ratio between the incoming material and the output of the operation.

  4. 4.

    Grade refers to the quality of the material in trees, logs, and lumber. Grades rank different qualities of material and are widely accepted as standards for trading and value determination in markets.

References

  1. Forbes K (2004) U.S. manufacturing: challenges and recommendations. Bus Econ 39(3):30–37

    Google Scholar 

  2. Associated Press (2008) Hard times hit the U.S. hardwood lumber industry. Associated Press, Charleston

    Google Scholar 

  3. Buehlmann U, Schuler A (2009) The U.S. household furniture industry: status and opportunities. For Prod J 59(9):20–28

    Google Scholar 

  4. Schuler A, Buehlmann U (2003) Identifying future competitive business strategies for the U.S. residential wood furniture industry: benchmarking and paradigm shifts. US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. Northeastern Research Station, Newton Square, p 19

    Google Scholar 

  5. Grushecky ST et al (2006) Decline in the US furniture industry: A case study of the impacts to the hardwood lumber supply chain. Wood Fiber Sci 38(2):365–376

    Google Scholar 

  6. Cole N (2008) Hardwood sawmills in state feeling strain. Arkansas Democrat Gazette

    Google Scholar 

  7. Reddy S (2008) U.S. factories slash output amid slump. Wall Street J

    Google Scholar 

  8. Schneider H, Shin A (2009) Industrial output falling sharply. Washington Post 2009, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  9. US Forest Service. Forest Inventory and Analysis (2012) [cited 2012 June 27]. http://www.fia.fs.fed.us/

  10. Fajvan MA, Grushecky ST, Hassler CC (1998) The effects of harvesting practices on west virginia’s wood supply. J For 96(5):33–39

    Google Scholar 

  11. Nyland RD (1992) Exploitation and greed in eastern hardwood forests. J For 90(1):33–37

    Google Scholar 

  12. Luppold WG, Bumgardner MS (2008) Timber value issues resulting from harvest activity in appalachian forests. In: Proceedings of 2008 southern forest economics workers annual meeting. Savannah, center for forest business, Warnell School Of Forestry And Natural Resources, University of Georgia, GA

    Google Scholar 

  13. Wiedenbeck JK et al (2003) Small-diameter hardwood utilization with emphasis on higher value products. In: Proceedings of enhancing the southern appalachian forest resource 2003. Department of Forestry, College Of Natural Resources, North Carolina State University

    Google Scholar 

  14. Brown SL, Schroeder P, Kern JS (1999) Spatial distribution of biomass in forests of the eastern USA. For Ecol Manage 123(1):81–90

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Miles PD, Van der Schaaf CL (2012) Minnesota’s forest resources, 2011, 2012. U.S. Department of agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Research Station: Newtown Square, PA, p 4

    Google Scholar 

  16. DNR (2010) Minnesota’s Forest Resources 2010, 2011. Department of Natural Resources, Division of Forestry, Saint Paul, p 59

    Google Scholar 

  17. Bumgardner MS et al (2000) Options for small-diameter hardwood utilization: past and present. In: Proceedings of the annual meeting of the southern forest economics workers (SOFEW), hardwoods—an underdeveloped resource, 26–28 Mar 2001 , Lexington

    Google Scholar 

  18. Cumbo D, Smith R, Araman P (2003) Low-grade hardwood lumber production, markets, and issues. For Prod J 53(9):17–24

    Google Scholar 

  19. Cantrell R, Paun D, LeVan-Green S (2004) An empirical analysis of an innovative application for an underutilized resource: small-diameter roundwood in recreational buildings. For Prod J 54(9):28–35

    Google Scholar 

  20. Perkins BR (2006) A business model for a red oak small diameter timber processing facility in southwest Virginia. Wood Science and Forest Products 2006, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, p 149

    Google Scholar 

  21. Becker DR, Eaton LM (2012) Something old and something new: forest bioenergy production in Minnesota. CURA Reporter 42:8

    Google Scholar 

  22. Levan-Green SL, Livingston J (2001) Exploring the uses for small-diameter trees. For Prod J 51(9):10

    Google Scholar 

  23. WCMA (2011) Wood component manufacturers association 2011 [cited 2011 March 15]. http://woodcomponents.org/

  24. Lawser S (2004) Market outlook for wood components. In: Proceedings of exploring new paths conference 2004, Edmonton, p 31

    Google Scholar 

  25. Bowyer JL et al (1986) Standard blanks: a new alternative to hardwood lumber. For Prod J 36(2):67–73

    Google Scholar 

  26. Lawser S (2009) Changing markets for wood components in remaining competitive in the wood components industry. Princeton, p 25

    Google Scholar 

  27. Tabarsi E et al (2003) A market assessment of the potential for OSB products in the North American office furniture and door manufacturing industries. For Prod J 53(7/8):19–27

    Google Scholar 

  28. McDaniel PWP (2003) Opportunities for the utilization of non-traditional species in wood-based component manufacturing. Wood Science and Forest Products, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg

    Google Scholar 

  29. Deaver ME (2006) Economic feasibility of a solid hardwood panel manufacturing enterprise. Wood and Paper Science, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, p 193

    Google Scholar 

  30. Shepley BP (2002) Simulating optimal part yield from no. 3A common lumber. Wood Science and Forest Products, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, p 148

    Google Scholar 

  31. Luppold W, Bumgardner M (2003) What is low-value and/or low-grade hardwood? For Prod J 53(3):54

    Google Scholar 

  32. Cumbo DW, Smith RL, Becker Iii CW (2004) Value analysis of lumber produced from small-diameter timber. For Prod J 54(10):29–34

    Google Scholar 

  33. Wengert EM, Meyer DA (1994) Guidelines for grading hardwood logs. University of Wisonsin-Madison, College of Agricultural and Life Sciences, Extension, Madison, p 6

    Google Scholar 

  34. NHLA (2011) National hardwood lumber association. 2011 [cited 2011 March 15]. http://www.nhla.com/

  35. Weiss JM, Thomas RE (2005) ROMI-3: rough-mill simulator version 3.0: user’s guide. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Research Station: Newtown Square, p 75

    Google Scholar 

  36. Wiedenbeck JK, Thomas E (1995) Don’t gamble your fortunes—focus on rough mill yield. Wood Wood Prod 100(7):148–149

    Google Scholar 

  37. Mitchell PH, Wiedenbeck J, Ammerman B (2003) Rough mill improvement guide for managers and supervisors. USDA Forest Service, Delaware, p 69

    Google Scholar 

  38. Buelmann U, Wiendenbeck JK, Strasser L (2005) Sawmill—log utilization study. North Carolina State University, Raleigh, p 51

    Google Scholar 

  39. Gephart JS, Petersen HD, Bratkovich SM (1995) Green dimensioning: a review of processing, handling, drying, and marketing. For Prod J 45(5):69–73

    Google Scholar 

  40. Lin W, Kline DE, Araman AP (1994) Dimension yields from factory grade 2 and 3 red oak logs. For Prod J 44(9):19–25

    Google Scholar 

  41. Wenjie L et al (1995) Producing hardwood dimension parts directly from logs: an economic feasibility study. For Prod J 45(6):38–46

    Google Scholar 

  42. Bratkovich SM et al (2000) Green dimensioning below-grade red oak logs: a minnesota case study. For Prod J 50(2):65

    Google Scholar 

  43. Reynolds HW, Schroeder J (1978) Furniture cuttings made from logging residue: the three-sided cant system. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station, Broomall, p 4

    Google Scholar 

  44. Araman PA (1982) Rough-part sizes needed from lumber for manufacturing furniture and kitchen cabinets. United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeast Forest Experiment Station, p 8

    Google Scholar 

  45. Araman PA, Gatchell CJ, Reynolds HW (1982) Meeting the solid wood needs of the furniture and cabinet industries: standard-size hardwood blanks. United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeast Forest Experiment Station, p 27

    Google Scholar 

  46. Reynolds HW, Gatchell CJ (1982) New technology for low-grade hardwood utilization: system 6. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Research Station, Broomall, p 8

    Google Scholar 

  47. Reynolds HW, Araman PA (1983) System 6: making frame-quality blanks from white oak thinnings. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station, Broomall, p 9

    Google Scholar 

  48. Buehlmann U et al (2010) Trends in the US hardwood lumber distribution industry: changing products, customers, and services. For Prod J 60(6):547–553

    Google Scholar 

  49. Espinoza O et al (2011) Assessing changes in the U.S. hardwood sawmill industry with a focus on markets and distribution. BioResources 6(3):2676–2689

    Google Scholar 

  50. Mihm J (2010) Incentives in new product development projects and the role of target costing. Manage Sci 56(8):1324–1344

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Feil P, Yook K-H, Kim I-W (2004) Japanese target costing: a historical perspective. Int J Strateg Cost Manag 2004(Spring):10–19

    Google Scholar 

  52. Prasad B (1996) Concurrent engineering fundamentals—integrated product and process organization. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River

    Google Scholar 

  53. Gatchell CJ, Thomas RE, Walker ES (1998) Data bank for kiln-dried red oak lumber. United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Research Station. p 64

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Bioproducts and Biosystems Engineering, University or Minnesota, Saint Paul, MN, 55108, USA

    Omar Espinoza

  2. Department of Sustainable Biomaterials, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA, 24060, USA

    Urs Buehlmann

  3. Product Development, Marsh Furniture Company, High Point, NC, 27260, USA

    Maurice Deaver

Authors
  1. Omar Espinoza
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Urs Buehlmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Maurice Deaver
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Omar Espinoza .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Universidade do Porto, Vitória, Portugal

    Américo Azevedo

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this paper

Cite this paper

Espinoza, O., Buehlmann, U., Deaver, M. (2013). Solid Wood Panel Manufacturing Using Low Quality Materials. In: Azevedo, A. (eds) Advances in Sustainable and Competitive Manufacturing Systems. Lecture Notes in Mechanical Engineering. Springer, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-00557-7_9

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-00557-7_9

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-00556-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-00557-7

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation