Lignocellulosic waste fibers and their application as a component of urea-formaldehyde adhesive composition in the manufacture of plywood

  • Pavlo BekhtaEmail author
  • Ján Sedliačik
  • František Kačík
  • Gregory Noshchenko
  • Angela Kleinová


This research uses lignocellulosic waste fibers from the fiberboard industry, pulp and paper mills for their effective processing to reduce waste discharge, preserve the ecological environment, and produce innovative and sustainable solutions. The effects of using waste fibers obtained from fiberboard wet process, recycled paper process, and cellulose process as adhesive additives on some physical and mechanical properties and formaldehyde emission of adhesives and plywood panels were examined. Three major types of fibers, primary fibrous sludge (PFS), primary cellulose sludge (PCS), and deinked paper sludge (DPS) were characterized and evaluated as adhesive fillers in plywood manufacturing. UF adhesive filled with 15 wt% wheat flour (WF) was used as a reference sample. Plywood panels were made of formulations with urea-formaldehyde (UF) resin filled with three different concentrations of fibers, 1 wt%, 3 wt%, and 5 wt%. Compared with DPS and PCS, PFS had a higher lignin and extractives content, and lower pH. These characteristics make PFS a better adhesive filler for plywood than DPS or PCS. Panels with UF/PFS, UF/DPS and UF/PCS formulations at a sludge content of 1–5 wt%, 1 wt% and 3 wt%, respectively had higher wet shear strengths than those made with the control sample. It was also found that the use of fibers obtained from different processes in the UF adhesive composition decreased the formaldehyde emission of panels. The PFS, PCS, and DPS reduced formaldehyde emissions by up to 27.8, 24.9, and 19.4%, respectively compared with control panels, without compromising the shear strength. The shear strength of plywood panels with all investigated sludges met the requirements of the EN 314-2 standard.



The authors acknowledge COST Action CA15216 “European Network of Bioadhesion Expertise: Fundamental Knowledge to Inspire Advanced Bonding Technologies” for support of ECOST-STSM-CA15216-010517-088783. Special thanks are extended to M.Sc. I. Salabay for determining the properties of the adhesives. This research was supported by the Slovak Research and Development Agency under the contract no. APVV-14-0506.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.


  1. Abdullah R, Ishak CF, Kadir WR, Bakar RA (2015) Characterization and feasibility assessment of recycled paper mill sludges for land application in relation to the environment. Int J Environ Res Public Health 12(8):9314–9329CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. ASTM D1200–10 (2018) Standard test method for viscosity by ford viscosity cup. ASTM International, West ConshohockenGoogle Scholar
  3. Basta AH, El-Saied H, Gobran RH (2004) Formaldehyde–free environmentally friendly composites based on agricultural waste. I. Novel adhesive system. Polym Plast Technol Eng 43(3):745–777CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Basta AH, El-Saied H, Gobran RH, Sultan MZ (2006) Enhancing environmental performance of formaldehyde-based adhesives in lignocellulosic composites, part III: evaluation of some starch derivatives. Des Monomers Polym 9:325–347CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Basta AH, El-Saied H, Winandy JE, Sabo R (2011) Preformed amide-containing biopolymer for improving the environmental performance of synthesized urea–formaldehyde in agro-fiber composites. J Polym Environ 19(2):405–412CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Basta AH, El-Saied H, Baraka AM, Lotfy VF (2017a) Beneficial effect of new activated carbons in enhancing the performance of particle boards from UF-rice straw. Pigm Resin Technol 46(2):139–147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Basta AH, El-Saied H, Baraka AM, Lotfy VF (2017b) Performance of carbon xerogels in the production of environmentally friendly urea formaldehyde-bagasse composites. Clean Soil Air Water 45:6. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Beauchamp CJ, Charest MH, Gosselin A (2002) Examination of environmental quality of raw and composting de-inking paper sludge. Chemosphere 46:887–895CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Benar P, Mandelli D, Gonçalves ARC, Ferreria MMC, Schuchardt U (1999) Principal component analisis on the hydroxymethylation of sugarcane lignin: a time-depending study by FTIR. J Wood Chem Technol 19(1–2):151–165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Boran S, Usta M, Gümüşkaya E (2011) Decreasing formaldehyde emission from medium density fiberboard panels produced by adding different amine compounds to urea formaldehyde resin. Int J Adhes Adhes 31(7):674–678CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Boran S, Usta M, Ondaral S, Gümüşkaya E (2012) The efficiency of tannin as a formaldehyde scavenger chemical in medium density fiberboard. Compos B 43(5):2487–2491CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Costa NA, Pereira J, Ferra J, Cruz P, Martins J, Magalhгes FD, Mendes A, Carvalho LH (2013) Scavengers for achieving zero formaldehyde emission of wood-based panels. Wood Sci Technol 47:1261–1272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Davis E, Shaler SM, Goodell B (2003) The incorporation of paper deinking sludge into fiberboard. Forest Prod J 53:46–54Google Scholar
  14. De Jong JI, De Jonge J (1953) Kinetics of the hydroxymethylation of phenols in dilute aqueous solution. Recl Trav Chim Pays-Bas 72(6):497–509CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dijkstra R, De Jonge J, Lammers MF (1962) The kinetics of the reaction of phenol and formaldehyde. Recl Trav Chim Pays-Bas 81(4):285–296CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ding W, Li W, Gao Q, Han C, Zhang S, Li J (2013) The effects of sealing treatment and wood species on formaldehyde emission of plywood. BioResources 8:2568–2582CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dunky M (1998) Urea-formaldehyde (UF) adhesive resins for wood. Int J Adhes Adhes 18(2):95–107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Edalatmanesh M, Sain M, Liss SN (2010) Cellular biopolymers and molecular structure of a secondary pulp and paper mill sludge verified by spectroscopy and chemical extraction techniques. Water Sci Technol 62(12):2846–2853CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Elloumi A, Makhlouf M, Elleuchi A, Bradai Ch (2016a) Deinking sludge (DS), a new bio-filler for HDPE composites. Polym Plast Technol Eng 55:1012–1020CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Elloumi A, Makhlouf M, Elleuchi A, Bradai Ch (2016b) The potential of deinking paper sludge for recycled HDPE reinforcement. Polym Compos. Google Scholar
  21. EN 314-1 (2004) Plywood. Bonding quality. Part 1: test methods. European Committee for Standardization, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  22. EN 314-2 (1993) Plywood. Bonding quality. Part 2: requirements. European Committee for Standardization, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  23. Eom Y-G, Kim J-S, Kim S, Kim J-A, Kim H-J (2006) Reduction of formaldehyde emission from particleboards by bio-scavengers. Mokchae Konghak 34:29–41Google Scholar
  24. European Commission (2008) Environmental, economic and social impacts of the use of sewage sludge on land. Final report. Part I: overview report. Milieu Ltd. (Belgium), Study Contract DG ENV.G.4/ETU/2008/0076r.
  25. Gangi M, Tabarsa T, Sepahvand S, Asghari J (2013) Reduction of formaldehyde emission from plywood. J Adhes Sci Technol 27(13):1407–1417CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Gao Z, Wang X-M, Wan H, Liu Y (2008) Curing characteristics of urea-formaldehyde resin in the presence of various amounts of wood extracts and catalysts. J Appl Polym Sci 107:1555–1562CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Gardner DJ, McGinnis GD (1988) Comparison of the reaction rates of the alkali-catalyzed addition of formaldehyde to phenol and selected lignins. J Wood Chem Technol 8(2):261–288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Geng X, Deng J, Zhang SY (2006) Effects of hot-pressing parameters and wax content on the properties of fiberboard made from paper mill sludge. Wood Fiber Sci 38:736–741Google Scholar
  29. Geng X, Deng J, Zhang SY (2007a) Paper mill sludge as a component of wood adhesive formulation. Holzforschung 61:688–692CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Geng XL, Zhang SY, Deng J (2007b) Characteristics of paper mill sludge and its utilization for the manufacture of medium density fiberboard. Wood Fiber Sci 39:345–351Google Scholar
  31. Grigoriou A (1987) Formaldehyde emission from the edges and faces of various wood based materials. Holz Roh Werkst 45(2):63–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Gui C, Zhu J, Zhang Z, Liu X (2016) Research progress on formaldehyde-free wood adhesive derived from soy flour. In: Rudawska A (ed) Adhesives—applications and properties. IntechOpen, London. Google Scholar
  33. Hamzeh Y, Ashori A, Mirzaei B (2011) Effects of waste paper sludge on the physico-mechanical properties of high density polyethylene/wood flour composites. J Polym Environ 19:120–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Hu J, Tian D, Renneckar S, Saddler JN (2018) Enzyme mediated nanofibrillation of cellulose by the synergistic actions of an endoglucanase, lytic polysaccharide monooxygenase (LPMO) and xylanase. Sci Rep 8(1):3195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. IARC (2006) Monographs on the evaluation of carcinogenic risk to humans. Vol 88. Formaldehyde, 2-butoxyethanol and 1-tert-butoxypropan-2-ol. European Committee for Standardization, World Health Organization—International Agency for Research on CancerGoogle Scholar
  36. ISO 11402 (2004) Phenolic, amino and condensation resins—determination of free-formaldehyde content. International Organization for Standardization, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  37. JIS A 1460 (2001) Building boards determination of formaldehyde emission—desiccator method. Japanese Industrial Standards Committee, TokyoGoogle Scholar
  38. Johns WE, Niazi KA (1980) Effect of pH and buffering capacity of wood on the gelation time of urea-formaldehyde resin. Wood Fiber 12(4):255–263Google Scholar
  39. Kamath YK, Hornby SB, Weigmann HD (1985) Irreversible chemisorption of formaldehyde on cotton cellulose. Textile Res J 55(11):663–666CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Karim Z, Mathew AP, Kokol V, Wei J, Grahn M (2016) High-flux affinity membranes based on cellulose nanocomposites for removal of heavy metal ions from industrial effluents. RSC Adv 6(25):20644–20653CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Kim S (2009a) Environment-friendly adhesives for surface bonding of wood-based flooring using natural tannin to reduce formaldehyde and TVOC emission. Bioresour Technol 100:744–748CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Kim S (2009b) The reduction of indoor air pollutant from wood-based composite by adding pozzolan for building materials. Constr Build Mater 23(6):2319–2323CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Kim S, Kim HJ, Kim HS, Lee HH (2006) Effect of bio-scavengers on the curing behavior and bonding properties of melamine-formaldehyde resins. Macromol Mater Eng 291(9):1027–1034CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Kmec S, Sedliacik J, Smidriakova M, Jablonski M (2010) Zeolite as a filler of UF resin for lower formaldehyde emission from plywood. Ann Warsaw Univ Life Sci 70:161–165Google Scholar
  45. Łebkowska M, Załęska-Radziwiłł M, Tabernacka A (2017) Adhesives based on formaldehyde—environmental problems. BioTechnologia 98(1):53–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Lee S-H, Chang F, Inoue S, Endo T (2010) Increase in enzyme accessibility by generation of nanospace in cell wall supramolecular structure. Bioresour Technol 101(19):7218–7223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Mahmood T, Elliott A (2006) A review of secondary sludge reduction technologies for the pulp and paper industry. Water Res 40:2093–2112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Malutan T, Nicu R, Popa VI (2008) Contribution to the study of hydroxymethylation reaction of alkali lignin. BioResources 3(1):13–20Google Scholar
  49. Migneault S, Koubaa A, Riedl B, Nadji H, Deng J, Zhang SY (2011a) Binderless fiberboard made from primary and secondary pulp and paper sludge. Wood Fiber Sci 43:180–193Google Scholar
  50. Migneault S, Koubaa A, Riedl B, Nadji H, Deng J, Zhang T (2011b) Potential of pulp and paper sludge as a formaldehyde scavenger agent in MDF resins. Holzforschung 65:403–409CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Monte MC, Fuente E, Blanco A, Negro C (2009) Waste management from pulp and paper production in the European Union. Waste Manag 29:293–308CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Moubarik A, Allal A, Pizzi A, Charreir B, Carreir F (2010) Characterization of a formaldehyde-free cornstarch-tannin wood adhesive for interior plywood. Eur J Wood Prod 68:427–433CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Myers GE (1984) How mole ratio of UF resin affects formaldehyde emission and other properties: a literature critique. Forest Prod J 34:35–41Google Scholar
  54. Myers GE (1986) Effects of post-manufacture board treatments on formaldehyde emission: a literature review (1960–1984). Forest Prod J 36:41–51Google Scholar
  55. Nemli G (2003) Effects of coating materials process parameters on the technological properties of particleboard. PhD Dissertation thesis, Karadeniz Teknik University, Trabzon, TurkeyGoogle Scholar
  56. Park BD, Kang EC, Park JY (2008) Thermal curing behavior of modified urea-formaldehyde resin adhesives with two formaldehyde scavengers and their influence on adhesion performance. J Appl Polym Sci 110(3):1573–1580CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Pervaiz M, Sain M (2011) Protein extraction from secondary sludge of paper mill wastewater and its utilization as a wood adhesive. BioResources 6:961–970Google Scholar
  58. Pizzi A, Mittal KL (2003) Handbook of adhesive technology, 2nd edn. Marcel Dekker, New York, p 672Google Scholar
  59. Poletto M, Zattera AJ, Santana R (2012) Structural differences between wood species: evidence from chemical composition, FTIR spectroscopy, and thermogravimetric analysis. J Appl Polym Sci 126:S1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Raquez J-M, Deléglise M, Lacrampe M-F, Krawczak P (2010) Thermosetting (bio)materials derived from renewable resources: a critical review. Prog Polym Sci 35(4):487–509CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Reig FB, Adelantado JVG, Moreno MCMM (2002) FTIR quantitative analysis of calcium carbonate (calcite) and silica (quartz) mixtures using the constant ratio method. Application to geological samples. Talanta 58(4):811–821CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Robertson JE, Robertson RRP (1977) Review of filler and extender quality evaluation. Forest Prod J 27:30–38Google Scholar
  63. Roffael E (1982) Die Formaldehydabgabe von Spanplatten und anderen Werkstoffen [The release of formaldehyde from particleboards and other materials]. DRW, StuttgartGoogle Scholar
  64. Roffael E (2006) Volatile organic compounds and formaldehyde in nature, wood and wood based panels. Holz Roh Werkst 64:144–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Roffael E (2016) Significance of wood extractives for wood bonding. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 100:1589–1596CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Rowell RM (2005) Handbook of chemistry and wood composites. CRC Press, Boca Raton, p 446Google Scholar
  67. Sastry GP (1969) The reaction of formaldehyde with spruce lignins. Holzforschung 23(1):15–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Seifert VK (1956) Über ein neues Verfahren zur Schnellbestimmung der Rein—Cellulose. Papier 10:301–306Google Scholar
  69. Sluiter A, Ruiz R, Scarlata C, Sluiter J, Templeton D (2008a). Determination of extractives in biomass: Laboratory Analytical Procedure (LAP). NREL/TP-510-42619. National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, COGoogle Scholar
  70. Sluiter A, Hames B, Ruiz R, Scarlata C, Sluiter J, Templeton D (2008b) Determination of ash in biomass. Technical Report NREL/TP-510-42622. National Renewable Energy Laboratory Golden, COGoogle Scholar
  71. Sluiter A, Hames B, Ruiz R, Scarlata C, Sluiter J, Templeton D, Crocker D (2011) Determination of structural carbohydrates and lignin in biomass: Laboratory Analytical Procedure (LAP). NREL/TP-510-42618. National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, COGoogle Scholar
  72. Son J, Yang HS, Kim HJ (2004) Physico-mechanical properties of paper sludge-thermoplastic polymer composites. J Thermoplast Compos Mater 17:509–522CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Stefke B, Dunky M (2006) Catalytic influence of wood on the hardening behavior of formaldehyde based resin adhesives used for wood-based panels. J Adhes Sci Technol 20(8):761–785CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Taherzadeh MJ, Karimi K (2008) Pretreatment of lignocellulosic wastes to improve ethanol and biogas production: a review. Int J Mol Sci 9:1621–1651CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Taramian A, Doosthoseini K, Mirshokraii SA, Faezipour M (2007) Particleboard manufacturing: an innovative way to recycle paper sludge. Waste Manag 27:1739–1746CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Vazquez G, Freire S, Rodriguez-Bona C, Gonzalez J, Antorrena G (1999) Structures, and reactivities with formaldehyde, of some acetosolv pine lignins. J Wood Chem Technol 19(4):357–378CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Williams RS (2010) Finishing of wood. In: Wood handbook. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Forest Products Laboratory, General Technical Report FPL-GTR-190. Madison, Chapter 16, pp 16-1–16-39Google Scholar
  78. Wise LE, Murphy M, D’addieco AA (1946) Chlorite holocellulose, its fractionation and bearing on summative wood analysis and on studies on the hemicelluloses. Pap Trade J 122(2):35–43Google Scholar
  79. Xing S, Riedl B, Koubaa A, Deng J (2012) Mechanical and physical properties of particleboard made from two pulp and paper mill secondary sludges. World J Eng 9:31–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Xing S, Riedl B, Deng J, Nadji H, Koubaa A (2013) Potential of pulp and paper secondary sludge as co-adhesive and formaldehyde scavenger for particleboard manufacturing. Eur J Wood Prod 71:705–716CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Wood-Based Composites, Cellulose and PaperUkrainian National Forestry UniversityLvivUkraine
  2. 2.Department of Furniture and Wood ProductsTechnical University in ZvolenZvolenSlovakia
  3. 3.Department of Chemistry and Chemical TechnologiesTechnical University in ZvolenZvolenSlovakia
  4. 4.Department of ChemistryUkrainian National Forestry UniversityLvivUkraine
  5. 5.Polymer InstituteSlovak Academy of SciencesBratislavaSlovakia

Personalised recommendations