Surface modification of Scots pine: the effect of process parameters on the through thickness density profile
- 429 Downloads
This study evaluated the significance of different process parameters (press temperature, closing time, holding time, moisture content and compression ratio) on solid wood surface densification and its effect on the density profile generated in Scots pine sapwood. Changes in the microstructure of the wood were also evaluated microscopically. The results showed that with a shorter closing time, densification occurred closer to the sample surface than with an extended closing time. At a compression temperature of 150 °C, the vertical density profile exhibited a sharp peak in density that was close to the wood surface. A higher temperature of 200 °C resulted in a slightly broader density peak that was less intense and further from the surface. A holding time of 10 min resulted in the wood compressing to a slightly greater extent than when using a holding time of 1 min. Higher moisture content led to more extensive deformation. The results indicate that surface modification by densification is a viable method of enhancing wood properties.
KeywordsClosing Time Compression Ratio Density Profile High Moisture Content Wood Surface
The study was partly funded by the Finnish Cultural Foundation and the Vocational Training Foundation of Woodworking Men. This study was partly carried out in BC, Bangor University (UK) and Aalto University (Finland). Authors acknowledge all support what have been given those institutions.
- 1.Kellog RM, Wangaard FF (1969) Wood Fiber Sci 1:180Google Scholar
- 2.Wilfong JG (1966) For Prod J 16:55Google Scholar
- 4.Salmén L (1990) In: Proceedings of materials research society symposiumGoogle Scholar
- 10.Fukuta S, Asada F, Yasutoshi S (2008) For Prod J 58:82Google Scholar
- 12.Rautkari L, Properzi M, Pichelin F, Hughes M (2008) In: Proceedings of 10th world conference on timber engineeringGoogle Scholar
- 15.Lamason C, Gong M (2007) For Prod J 57:64Google Scholar
- 16.Tarkow H, Seborg R (1968) For Prod J 18:104Google Scholar
- 19.Camm A, Quilter K (2001) In: Proceedings of the fifth panel products symposium. Llandudno, Wales, UKGoogle Scholar
- 20.Cai Z, Muehl JH, Winandy JE (2006) For Prod J 56:20Google Scholar
- 24.Tabarsa T, Chui YH (1997) For Prod J 47:71Google Scholar
- 25.Inoue M, Norimoto M, Otsuka Y, Yamada T (1991) Mokuzai Gakkaishi 37:227Google Scholar