Improving the utility, performance, and durability of wood- and bio-based composites
This paper briefly reviews the state of the art in various types of wood- and bio-based composites, summarizes recent advances, and then discusses future possibilities for improving the durability of wood- and bio-based composites.
Wood can be processed and reformed into a number of different biocomposites.
We aimed at reviewing the state of the art in various types of wood- and bio-based composites.
Review of utility, performance and durability of wood- and bio-based composites.
The advanced biocomposites will:
Combine wood, natural biofibers, and non-biomaterials to create synergistic hybrid materials that far exceed performance capabilities of current biocomposites
Be renewable, recyclable, and totally sustainable
Provide superior performance and serviceability exceeding performance of current biocomposites
Be more durable, dimensionally stable, moisture proof, and fire resistant
Be less expensive to produce and use (over the life cycle of use) than the materials they replace
The next generation of advanced wood- and bio-based composites must provide high-performance construction and specialty products that simultaneously promote resource and environmental sustainability and provide advanced performance, long-term performance, enhanced durability, and value.
KeywordsComposites Wood-based composites Bio-based composites Durability Performance Moisture issues
- ANSI (2009a) ANSI Standard A208.1: American National Standard for particleboardGoogle Scholar
- ANSI (2009b). ANSI Standard A208.2: American National Standard for fiberboardGoogle Scholar
- APA (2014) Performance standard for wood-based structural panels. APA Tech. Bull. S350. ANSI Standard PS-2-2010Google Scholar
- ASTM (2016) ASTM Standard D7857: standard test method to evaluate the effects of FR chemicals on properties of strand-based composites. ASTM book of standards. West Conshohocken, PA.Google Scholar
- AWPA (2016a) Standard U-1 and T-1. Standards for pressure treated wood. AWPA book of standards. American Wood Protection Association, Birmingham, ALGoogle Scholar
- AWPA (2016b) Guidance Document L: data requirements of listing chemically modified wood with enhanced durability in AWPA standards. AWPA book of standards. American Wood Protection Association. Birmingham, ALGoogle Scholar
- AWPA (2016c) Guidance Document N: data requirements of listing thermally modified wood with enhanced durability in AWPA standards. AWPA book of standards. American Wood Protection Association. Birmingham, ALGoogle Scholar
- Ayrilmis N, Kartal SN, Laufenberg TL, Winandy JE, White RH (2005) Physical and mechanical properties and fire, decay, and termite resistance of treated oriented strandboard. Forest Prod J 55(5):74–81Google Scholar
- Fahlstrom GB (1982) Durability of CCA-B treated plywood having non-conforming penetration patters. Forest Prod J 32(2):51–52Google Scholar
- Gardner D, Tascioglu C, Wålinder M (2003) Wood composite protection. In: Goodell B, Nicholas DD, Schultz TP (eds) Wood deterioration and preservation: advances in our changing world. American Chemical Society, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
- Kent SM, Leichti RJ, Rosowsky DV, Morrell JJ (2004a) Biodeterioration effects on nailed connections. In: Proceedings World Timber Engineering Conference, Helsinki, Finland. June 2004. 6 pagesGoogle Scholar
- Kent SM, Leichti RJ, Rosowsky DV, Morrell JJ (2004b) Effects of decay by Postia placenta on the lateral capacity of nailed oriented strandboard sheathing and Douglas-fir framing members. Wood Fiber Sci 36:560–572Google Scholar
- Kilpatrick J, Barnes HM (2006) Biocide treatments for wood composites—a review. IRG/WP 06-40323. Int’l. Res. Group on Wood Preservation. Stockholm, SwedenGoogle Scholar
- King DT, Sinha A, Morrell JJ (2015) Effect of wetting on performance of small-scale shear walls. Wood Fiber Sci 47(1):74–83Google Scholar
- Kretschmann DE, Winandy JE, Clausen C, Wiemann M, Bergman R, Rowell R, Zerbe J, Beecher J, White R, McKeever D, Howard J (2007) Wood. In: Kirk-Othmer encyclopedia of chemical technology. NY. J. Wiley & Sons. 60p. (https://www.fpl.fs.fed.us/documnts/pdf2007/fpl_2007_kretschmann001.pdf).
- Lake MA, McIntyre CR (2006) Formosan termite response to weathered borate-treated wood. Proceedings: Wood protection 2006, Forest Products Society, Madison, WI. pp 295–298Google Scholar
- Laks P, Richter D, Larkin G, Eskola J (2010) A survey of the biological resistance of commercial WPC decking. In: 10th Pacific Rim Bio-Based Composites Symposium, October 5–8, 2010, Banff, Alberta, Canada pp 193–201.Google Scholar
- Mankowski M, Morrell J (2000) Patterns of fungal attack in wood–plastic composites following exposure in a soil block test. Wood Fiber Sci 32:340–345Google Scholar
- Miller DJ, Currier RA (1984) Permeability of glue lines in Douglas-fir plywood by preservative solutions. Forest Prod J 14(7):303–309Google Scholar
- Morrell JJ, Stark N, Pendleton D, McDonald A (2010) Durability of wood-plastic composites. In: Tenth International Conference on Wood and Biofiber Plastic Composites and Cellulose Nanocomposites Symposium, May 11–13, Madison, WI. Madison, WI: Forest Products SocietyGoogle Scholar
- Morrell JJ, Vidrine C, Jin L, Preston AF (2012) Termite resistance of copper-based preservative supplemented aspen strandboards. International Research Group on Wood Protection Document No. IRG/WP/12-30594. Stockholm, Sweden. 8pGoogle Scholar
- Morris P, Cooper P (1998) Recycled plastic/wood composite lumber attacked by fungi. Forest Prod J 48:86–88Google Scholar
- Moya L, Tze WTZ, Winandy JE (2009) The effect of cyclic relative humidity changes on moisture content and thickness swelling behavior of oriented strandboards. Wood Fiber Sci 41(4):447–460Google Scholar
- Murphy RJ, Dickinson DJ, Turner P, Wickens PJ, Hashim R (1993) Vapor boron treatment of wood composites. In: Proc. IUFRO Symp. on the PWood-Based Composite Products. A.F. Preston, ed. Forest Prod. Soc., Madison, WI. pp. 49–56.Google Scholar
- Ross A, Ward H, Smith W (2003) New generation of preservation treatments for wood-based panels and other engineered wood products. In: Proc. 2003 European Panel Products Conference, Wales, UK. 8ppGoogle Scholar
- Sabo R, Elhaijar R, Clemons C, Pillai K (2015) Characterization and processing of nanocellulose thermosetting composites. Chap 15. In: J.K. Pandey et al. (eds.) Handbook of polymer nanocomposites. Processing, performance and application—volume C: polymer nanocomposites of cellulose nanoparticles. Springer-Verlag. BerlinGoogle Scholar
- Schauwecker C, Morrell J, McDonald A, Fabiyi J (2006) Degradation of a wood-plastic composite exposed under tropical conditions. Forest Prod J 56(11–12):123–129Google Scholar
- Schmidt EL (1993) Decay testing and moisture changes for a plastic wood composite. Proc Amer Wood Protection Assoc 89:108–109Google Scholar
- Schmidt EL, Hall HJ, Gertejansen RO, Carll CG, DeGroot RC (1983) Biodeterioration and strength reductions in preservative treated aspen waferboard. Forest Prod J 33(11/12):45–53Google Scholar
- Silva A, Gartner B, Morrell J (2007) Towards the development of accelerated methods for assessing the durability of wood plastic composites. ASTM J Test Eval 35(3):203–210Google Scholar
- Smith B, Bailey D (2003) Emerging domestic markets for treated lumber. Proceedings: Enhancing the durability of lumber and engineered wood products. Forest Products Society, Madison, WI. pp 3–6Google Scholar
- Smith RS, Balcaen P (1978) Effect of species composition of preservative treated Douglas-fir plywood on its decay resistance. International Research Group on Wood Preservation Document No. IRG/WP/214. Stockholm, SwedenGoogle Scholar
- Smith W, Wu Q (2005) Durability improvement for structural wood composites through chemical treatment. Forest Prod J 55(2):8–17Google Scholar
- Suchsland O, Woodson GE (1987) Fiberboard manufacturing practices in the United States. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Ag. Handbook 640. Washington, DC. 26pGoogle Scholar
- U.S. Census Bureau (2014) 2014 characteristics of new housing. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. 763 pg. (http://www.census.gov/construction/chars/pdf/c25ann2014.pdf).
- U.S. Census Bureau (2015) Residential construction in September 2015. U.S. Department Housing and Urban Development. CB15-176. 6 pg. (http://www.census.gov/construction/nrc/pdf/newresconst.pdf).
- USDA (2010) Wood handbook: wood as an engineering material. USDA, For. Serv. Gen. Tech. Report FPL-GTR-190, Madison, WI. 508 pgs. (https://www.fpl.fs.fed.us/documnts/fplgtr/fpl_gtr190.pdf ).
- Verhey S, Laks P, Richter D (2001) Laboratory decay resistance of woodfiber/thermoplastic composites. Forest Prod J 51(9):44–49Google Scholar
- Vidrine C, Kamke FA, Morrell JJ, Preston AF (2008) Preserving panels by furnish addition of copper compounds: effects on panel properties. Proc Amer Wood Protection Assoc 104:135–145Google Scholar
- Wang W, Morrell J (2004) Water sorption characteristics of two wood–plastic composites. Forest Prod J 54:209–212Google Scholar
- Winandy J, Barnes HM, Hatfield C (2000) Temperatures of wood roof materials and attics in Mississippi and Wisconsin. USDA, For. Serv. Res. Paper FPL-RP-589, Madison, WI. 24pGoogle Scholar