Advertisement

Holz als Roh- und Werkstoff

, Volume 63, Issue 3, pp 173–178 | Cite as

Natural decay resistance of LVL made of veneers from durable and non-durable wood species

  • P. Nzokou
  • J. Zyskowski
  • S. Boury
  • D. P. Kamdem
Originalarbeiten/Originals

Abstract

Laminated veneer lumber (LVL) was laboratory manufactured using veneers from decay and non decay resistant species in order to evaluate changes in the durability as a result of the LVL manufacturing process, and to test if the mixing of decay resistant species and non decay resistant species can improve durability. Laboratory soil block test and field test were conducted. The durability of solid wood was comparable to that of LVL made using the same species. For LVL made using veneer from durable and non-durable wood species, durability was improved when two faces and one core veneers were from decay resistant species.

Keywords

Wood Species Black Locust Solid Wood Laminate Veneer Lumber Decay Resistance 

Natürliche Fäulnisresistenz von Brettschichtholz aus haltbaren und nicht haltbaren Holzarten

Zusammenfassung

Aus fäulnisunbeständigen und -beständigen Holzarten wurde in einem Labor Brettschichtholz hergestellt, um Veränderungen in der Dauerhaftigkeit auf Grund ihres Herstellungsverfahrens zu evaluieren, und um zu prüfen, ob das Mischen von fäulnisunbeständigem mit fäulnisbeständigen Holzarten die Dauerhaftigkeit von LVL verbessern kann. Bodentests wurden im Labor und als Freilandversuche durchgeführt. Bei Verwendung derselben Spezies war die Dauerhaftigkeit von massivem Holz vergleichbar mit derjenigen von LVL. Bei Brettschichtholz, welches aus resistenten und nicht resistenten Arten gefertigt war, wurde die Dauerhaftigkeit verbessert, wenn zwei Aussenschichten und eine Innenschicht aus einer fäulnisbeständigen Holzart war.

References

  1. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) (2000) Book of standards. West Conshohoken, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  2. American Wood Preservers’ Association (2002) Book of standards. Granbury, TXGoogle Scholar
  3. Biblis EJ (1996) Comparison of flexural and shear properties of southern pine LVL and lumber from young plantation and natural stands. Ann Sci For 53:1167–1175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bodig J, Fyie J (1986) Performance requirements for exterior laminated veneer lumber. Forest Prod J 36(2):49–54Google Scholar
  5. DeGroot RC, Gjovik LR, Crawford D, Woodward B (1998) Field durability of CCA- and ACA-treated plywood composed of hardwood and softwood veneers. Forest Prod J 48(2):76–82Google Scholar
  6. Dirol D, Scalbert A (1991) Improvement of wood decay resistance by tannin impregnation. In: Proceeding of annual meeting of IRG on wood preservation. Japan, May 1991, p 13Google Scholar
  7. Findlay WPK (1985) The nature and durability of wood, pp 1–13. In: Findlay WPK (ed) Natural durability of timber in the tropics. Kluwer, Dordrecht, p 273CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Fougerousse M (1985) Protection of logs and sawn timber, pp 75–119. In: Findlay WPK (ed) Natural durability of timber in the tropics. Kluwer, Dordrecht, p 273CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gomben PC, Gorman TM (1994) Treatability of lodgepole pine laminated veneer lumber. Forest Prod J 44(2):39–41Google Scholar
  10. Harding OV, Van Wyk JL, Orange RP (1998) Influence of three processing strategies on stiffness and dimensional stability of radiata pine structural lumber. Forest Prod J 48(5):57–62Google Scholar
  11. Hart JH, Hillis WE (1972) Inhibition of wood-rotting fungi by ellagitannins in the heartwood of Quercus alba. Phytopathology 62:171–181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hartford WH, Colley RH (1976) The “performance index” comes of age. In: Proceedings of the American Wood-preservers’Association (AWPA, Woodstock) 80:233–241Google Scholar
  13. Kamdem DP (1994) Fungal decay resistance of aspen blocks treated with heartwood extracts. Forest Prod J 44(1):30–32Google Scholar
  14. Kamdem DP, Sean ST (1994) The durability of phenolic-bonded particleboards made of decay-resistant black locust and non durable aspen. Forest Prod J 44(2):65–68Google Scholar
  15. Nzokou P, Kamdem DP (2003) Fungal decay resistance of non-durable aspen wood treated with extractives from African padauk. J Tropical Forest Prod 9(1–2):125–133Google Scholar
  16. Roos K, Edwardson C, Adams R (1993) Manufacture of laminated veneer lumber from preservative treated veneers. In: Proceedings of the IUFRO—symposium: protection of wood based composite products, Orlando, pp 69–78Google Scholar
  17. Scalbert A (1991) Antimicrobial properties of tannins. Phytochemistry 30(12):3875–3883CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Scalbert A (1992) Tannins in wood and their contribution to microbial decay prevention. Plant Polyphenols. Plenum Press, New York, p 17Google Scholar
  19. Scheffer TC, Cowling EB (1966) Natural resistance of wood to microbial deterioration. Ann Rev Phytopathol 4:147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Shupe TF, Hse CY, Groom LH, Choong ET (1997) Effect of silvicultural practice and veneer grade lay-up on some mechanical properties of loblolly pine LVL. Forest Prod J 47(9):63–69Google Scholar
  21. Smith AL, Campbell CL, Walker DB, Hanover JW (1989) Extracts from black locust as wood preservative: extraction of decay resistance from black locust heartwood. Holzforschung 43(5):293–296CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Srinivasan U, Ung T, Taylor A, Cooper PA (1999) Natural durability and waterborne preservative treatability of tamarack. Forest prod J 49(1):82–87Google Scholar
  23. Stump JP, Smith LA, Gray RL (1981) Laminated veneer lumber made from plantation-grown conifer. Forest Prod J 31(4):34–40Google Scholar
  24. Tsunoda K, Kawai S (1993) Biological resistance of phenolic resin-treated compressed laminated veneer lumber. In proceeding of the IUFRO—symposium: protection of wood-based-composites products, Orlando, pp 18–22Google Scholar
  25. Van Acker JCR, Stevens MKM (1993) Improvement in decay resistance of some commercial plywood by waterborne and solvent-borne preservative treatments. In: proceedings of the IUFRO—symposium: protection of wood based composite products. Orlando, pp 88–92Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • P. Nzokou
    • 1
  • J. Zyskowski
    • 1
  • S. Boury
    • 1
  • D. P. Kamdem
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of ForestryMichigan State UniversityEast LansingUSA

Personalised recommendations