Journal of Wood Science

, Volume 58, Issue 6, pp 513–524 | Cite as

Effect of nanoclay on some applied properties of oriented strand board (OSB) made from underutilized low quality paulownia (Paulownia fortunei) wood

  • Ayoub Salari
  • Taghi Tabarsa
  • Abolghasem Khazaeian
  • Ahmadreza Saraeian
Original article


In this study, the effect of nanoclay on some applied properties of oriented strand board (OSB) made from underutilized low quality paulownia wood was investigated. Organo-modified montmorillonite (MMT) at four levels (0, 1, 3 and 5 %) was added to urea formaldehyde (UF) resin. Some chemical properties of paulownia wood (holocellulose, cellulose, lignin and ash contents, pH value and hot and cold water solubility), mechanical [modulus of rupture (MOR), modulus of elasticity (MOE), internal bond strength, screw and nail withdrawal strengths], physical (water absorption and thickness swelling) properties and formaldehyde emission of the strand boards were evaluated. Mechanical properties of all panels complied with the general-purpose OSB minimum property requirements of European Norm. With increasing 5 % nanoclay to UF resin, mechanical and physical properties of the resulting panels improved and formaldehyde emission decreased. However, none of the panels satisfied the thickness swelling and water absorption requirement. The results of X-ray diffraction and transmission electron microscope analysis confirmed the good dispersion of nanoclay in the resulting OSBs. Using paulownia as a fast-growing underutilized species not only can sustain the forests but also can supply raw material to countries facing shortage of wood.


Paulownia wood Applied properties Nanoclay Formaldehyde emission Transmission electron microscopy (TEM) 



The authors gratefully acknowledge financial assistance of Iran Nanotechnology Initiative Council and the Research Deputy of Gorgan University of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources.


  1. 1.
    Papadopoulos AN, Traboulay E (2002) Dimensional stability of OSB made from acetylated fir strands. HolzalsRoh-und Werkstoff 60(2):84–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ashori A, Nourbakhsh A (2008) Effect of press cycle time and resin contents on physical and mechanical properties of particleboard panels made from the underutilized low-quality raw materials. Ind Crops Prod 28(2):225–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Pirayesh H, KhazaeianA(2012) Using almond (Prunusamygdalus L.) shell as a bio-waste resource in wood based composite. Composites Part B 43: 1475–1479Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ndazi B, Tesha JV, Nisanda ETN (2006) Some opportunities and challenges of producing bio-composites from non-wood residues. J Mater Sci 41:6984–6990CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Joshi SV, Drza LV, Mohanty AK, Arora S (2004) Are natural fiber composites environmentally superior to glass fiber reinforced composites? Composites Part A 35:371–376Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Jiménez L, Rodriguez A, Ferrer JL, Pérez A, Angulo V (2005) Paulownia, a fast growing plant, as a raw material for paper manufacturing. Afinidad 62:100–105Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bergmann BA (1998) Propagation method influences first year field survival and growth of Paulownia. New Forest 16:251–264CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Martinez E, Lucas-Borja ME, Andres Abellan M, Lopez Serrano FR, Garcia Morote A, del Cerro Barja A (2010) Aprovechamientoenergetico de Paulownia spp. en el ambitomediterraneo. Revista Montes 102:5–12Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Rebollar M, Pérez R, Vidal R (2007) Comparison between oriented strand boards and other wood-based panels for the manufacture of furniture. Mater Des 28:882–888CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dunky M, Pizzi A (2002) Wood adhesives. In: Chaudhury M and Pocius AV (eds) Adhesive science and engineering—2: surfaces, chemistry and applications, chap 23. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 1039–1103Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wang Z, Li L, Gong M (2012) Measurement of dynamic modulus of elasticity and damping ratio of wood-based composites using the cantilever beam vibration technique. Constr Build Mater 28:831–834CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Aydin I, Gursel C, Semra C, Cenk D (2006) Effects of moisture content on formaldehyde emission and mechanical properties of plywood. Build Environ 41:1311–1316CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Doosthoseini K, Zarea-Hosseinabadi H (2010) Using Na + MMT nanoclay as a secondary filler in plywood manufacturing. J Indian Acad Wood Sci 7(1–2):58–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Abdolzadeh H, Doosthoseini K, Karimi AN, Enayati AA (2011) The effect of acetylated particle distribution and type of resin on physical and mechanical properties of poplar particleboard. Eur J Wood Prod 69(1):3–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lin Q, Yang G, Liu J, Rao J (2006) Property of nano-SiO2/urea formaldehyde resin. Front For China 2:230–237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Roumeli E, Pavlidou E, Papadopoulou E, Vourlias G, Bikiaris D, Paraskevopoulos KM, Chrissafis K (2012) Synthesis, characterization and thermal analysis of urea formaldehyde/nanoSiO2 resins. Thermochimica Acta 527:33–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Wang S, Yang T, Lin L, Lin C, Tsai M (2008) Fire-retardant-treated low formaldehyde-emission particleboard made from recycled wood-waste. Bioresour Technol 99:2072–2077PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Nemli G, Ozturk I (2006) Influences of some factors on the formaldehyde content of particleboard. Build Environ 41:770–774CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kim S, Kim HJ (2005) Effect of addition of polyvinyl acetate to melamine–formaldehyde resin on the adhesion and formaldehyde emission in engineered flooring. Int J Adhes Adhes 25:456–461CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lei H, Du G, Pizzi A, Celzard A (2008) Influence of nanoclay on urea-formaldehyde resins for wood adhesives and its model. J Appl Polym Sci 109:2442–2451CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Haq M, Burgueno R, Mohanty AK, Misra M (2008) Hybrid bio-based composites from blends of unsaturated polyester and soybean oil reinforced with nanoclay and natural fibers. Compos Sci Technol 68:3344–3351CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Khanjanzadeh H, Tabarsa T, Shakeri A (2012) Morphology, dimensional stability and mechanical properties of polypropylene—wood flour composites with and without nanoclay. J Reinf Plast Compos 31(5):341–350CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Reddy N, Yang Y (2009) Properties and potential applications of natural cellulose fibers from the bark of cotton stalks. Bioresour Technol 100:3563–3569PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Zeng QH, Yu AB, Lu GQ, Paul DR (2005) Clay-based polymer nanocomposites: research and commercial development. J Nanosci Nanotechnol 5:1574–1592PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    ArafaΙM FaresMM, Barham AS (2004) Sol-gel preparation and properties of interpenetrating, encapsulating and blend silica-based urea-formaldehyde hybrid materials. Eur Polym J 40:1477–1487CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Khanjanzadeh H, Tabarsa T, Shakeri A, Omidvar A (2011) Effect of organoclay platelets on the mechanical properties of wood plastic composites formulated with virgin and recycled polypropylene. Wood Mat Sci Eng 6(4):207–212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Ashori A, Nourbakhsh A (2009) Effects of nanoclay as a reinforcement filler on the physical and mechanical properties of wood-based composite. J Compos Mater 43:1869–1875CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    T 257 cm. Sampling and preparing wood for analysis, TAPPI Standards; 1985Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Wise LE, Karl HL (1962) In: Earl Libby C (ed) Cellulose and hemicelluloses in pulp and paper science and technology, vol 1. McGraw Hill Book Co, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    T 222 om (1998) Acid-insoluble lignin in wood and pulp. TAPPI StandardsGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    T 211 om (1993) Ash in wood and pulp. TAPPI StandardsGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    T 207 om (1999) Water solubility of wood and pulp. TAPPI StandardsGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Browning BL (1967) In: Holocellulose content in wood, methods of wood chemistry, vol. I–II. Interscience Publishers, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    EN 310 (1993) Determination of bending strength and modulus of elasticity. EN 312. 2003. Particleboards—specificationsGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    EN 319 (1993) Particleboards and fiberboards; determination of tensile strength perpendicular to the plane of the boardGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    ASTM D 1037-96 (1999) Standard methods for evaluating properties of wood-base fiber and particle panel materials. American Society for Testing and Materials, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    EN 325 (1993) Determination of dimensions of test pieces. EN 326-1 (1993) Sampling, cutting, and inspection. Part 1Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    EN 317 (1993) Particleboards and fiberboards—determination of swelling in thickness after immersion in waterGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    EN 323 (1993) Determination of densityGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Australian/New Zealand standard AS/NZS 1859.1 (2004) Reconstituted wood-based panels Specifications. Part 1: particleboardGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Nemli G, Demirel S, Gümüokaya E, Aslan M, Acar C (2009) Feasibility of incorporating waste grass clippings (Loliumperenne L.) in particleboard composites. Waste Manag 29:1129–1131PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Ashori A, Nourbakhsh A (2010) Reinforced polypropylene composites: effects of chemical compositions and particle size. Bioresour Technol 101:2515–2519PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    European Committee for Standardization. Wood-based panels, Brussel, Belgium. EN 300. 1997: Oriented strand boards (OSB)—definitions, classification specificationsGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Copur Y, Guler C, Akgul M, Tascioglu C (2007) Some chemical properties of hazelnut husk and its suitability for particleboard production. Build Environ 42:2568–2572CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Ayrilmis N, Buyuksari U, Avci E, Koc E (2009) Utilization of pine (Pinuspinea L.) cone in manufacture of wood-based composite. For Ecol Manag 259:65–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Pirayesh H, Khazaeian A, Tabarsa T (2012) The potential for using Walnut (Juglansregia L.) shell as a raw material for wood-based particleboard manufacturing. Compos B. doi: 10.1016/j.compositesb.2012.02.016 Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Ziaeddin Hosseini S, Afra E (2006) A study of fiber characterization and chemical composition of paulownia (Paulownia fortunei) in Gorgan region Iranian (in Persian). J Nat Resour 58(4):871–878Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Nourbakhsh A, Ashori A (2010) Wood plastic composites from agro-waste materials: analysis of mechanical properties. Bioresour Technol 101:2525–2528PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Salari A (2012) Influence of nanoclay and nanosilica on properties of oriented strand board (OSB) Product from Paulownia. M.S. Thesis 2012. Department of Wood and Paper Technology, Gorgan University of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources (GUASNR), GorganGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Shi J, LI J, Zhou W, Zhang D (2007) Improvement of wood properties by urea formaldehyde resin and nano-SiO2. Front For China 2(1):104–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Gindl W, Schoberl T, Jeronimidis G (2004) The interphase in phenol–formaldehyde and polymeric methylene diphenyl-di-isocyanate glue lines in wood. Int J Adhes Adhes 24:279–286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Zahedsheijani R, Faezipour M, Tarmian A, Layeghi M, Yousefi H (2011) The effect of Na + montmorillonite (NaMMT) nanoclay on thermal properties of medium density fiberboard (MDF). Eur J Wood Prod. doi: 10.1007/s00107-011-0583-6 Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Buyuksarı U, Hiziroglu S, Akkılıc H, Ayrılmıs N (2012) Mechanical and physical properties of medium density fiberboard panels laminated with thermally compressed veneer. Composites Part B 43:110–114Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Buyuksari U, Ayrilmis N, Avci E, Koc E (2010) Evaluation of the physical, mechanical properties and formaldehyde emission of particleboard manufactured from waste stone pine (Pinuspinea L.) cones. Bioresour Technol 101:255–259PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Nemli G, Aydin A (2007) Evaluation of the physical and mechanical properties of particleboard made from the needle litter of Pinus pinaster Ait. Ind Crops Prod 26(3):252–258CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Zheng Y, Pan Z, Zhang R, EI-Mashad HM, Pan J, Jenkins BM (2009) Anaerobic digestion of saline creeping wild ryegrass for biogas production and pretreatment of particleboard material. Bioresour Technol 100:1582–1588PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Yang P, Zhang F (2004) Study on cure conditions of PMDI-based binder in use of wheat straw particleboard. China Adhesives 14:37–39Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Nemli G, Kırcı H, Serdar B, Ay N (2003) Suitability of kiwi pruning for particleboard manufacturing. Ind Crops Prod 17:39–46Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Guntekin E, Karakus B (2008) Feasibility of using eggplant stalks (Solanum melongena) in the production of experimental particleboard. Ind Crops Prod 27:354–358CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Nourbakhsh A, Farhani Baghlani F, Ashori A (2011) Nano-SiO2 filled rice husk/polypropylene composites: physico-mechanical properties. Ind Crops Prod 33:183–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Gwon JG, Lee SY, Chun SJ, Doh GH, Kim JH (2010) Effects of chemical treatments of hybrid fillers on the physical and thermal properties of wood plastic composites. Part A 41:1491–1497CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Oudjehane A, Lam F (1998) On the density profile within random and oriented wood-based composite panels: horizontal distribution. Compos B 29B:687–694CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Hsu WE, Schwald W, Shields JA (1989) Chemical and physical changes required for producing dimensionally stable wood-based composites. Part 2: chemical and physical changes required for producing dimensionally stable wood-based composites. Wood Sci Technol 23(3):281–288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Mohebby B, Gorbani-Kokandeh M, Soltani M (2009) Springback in acetylated wood based composites. Constr Build Mater 23:3103–3106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Biswas D, Bose SK, Hossain MM (2011) Physical and mechanical properties of urea formaldehyde-bonded particleboard made from bamboo waste. Int J Adhes Adhes 31(2):84–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Deka BK, Maji TK (2010) Effect of coupling agent and nanoclay on properties of HDPE, LDPE, PP, PVC blend and Phargamites karka nanocomposite. Compos Sci Technol 70(12):1755–1761CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Tabarsa T, Chui YH (1997) Effects of hot-pressing on properties of white spruce. Forest Prod J 47:71–76Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Welzbacher CR, Wehsener J, Rapp AO, Haller P(2008) Thermo-mechanical densification combined with thermal modification of Norway spruce (Piceaabies Karst) in industrial scale—dimensional stability and durability aspects. HolzRohWerkst 66:39–49Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Tabarsa T, Jahanshahi S, Ashori A (2010) Mechanical and physical properties of wheat straw boards bonded with a tannin modified phenol-formaldehyde adhesive. Compos B 42(2):176–180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Bektas I, Guler C, Kalaycioglu H, Mengeloglu F, Nacar M (2005) The manufacture of particleboards using sunflower stalks (Helianthus annuus) and poplar wood (Populus alba L.). J Compos Mater 39(5):467–473CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Kord B, Hemmasi AH, Ghasemi I (2010) Properties of PP/wood flour/organo modified montmorillonite nanocomposites. J Wood Sci Technol 45:111–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Adame D, Beall GW (2009) Direct measurement of the constrained polymer region in polyamide/clay nanocomposites and the implications for gas diffusion. Appl Clay Sci 42:545–552CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Kim S (2009) Environment-friendly adhesives for surface bonding of wood-based flooring using natural tannin to reduce formaldehyde and TVOC emission. Bioresour Technol 100:744–748PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Nemli G, Kalaycıoglu H (2006) The resistances of several types of overlaying materials against cigarette burn, scratch, and abrasion. Build Environ 41:640–645CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Japan Wood Research Society 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ayoub Salari
    • 1
  • Taghi Tabarsa
    • 1
  • Abolghasem Khazaeian
    • 1
  • Ahmadreza Saraeian
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Wood and Paper TechnologyGorgan University of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources (GUASNR)GorganIran

Personalised recommendations