Binderless Particleboard Resistance to Termite Attack

Transcription

1 Binderless Particleboard Resistance to Termite Attack Presented at: The International Conference on Wood Adhesives InterContinental Toronto Centre, Canada 9-11 October 2013

2 PRESENTATION OUTLINE INTRODUCTION Background Purpose of Study METHODS RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Lab Subterranean Termite Test In-Ground Test Dry Wood Termite Test CONCLUSION ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

3 INTRODUCTION Background Logs Production Indonesian Logs Production Plant For Nat For Source: MoF (2011)

4 Dipterocarp from Natural Forest West Kalimantan, Feb 2006

5 Mahogany from Plantation Forest Central Java, Sep 2013

6 Logs Production Log supply in Indonesia in 2009 (MoF, 2010): Community forests 2 million m 3 Natural Forest 4.6 million m 3 Industrial Plantation Forest 25 million m 3 Logs from community forest: Harvested at a young age (4-6 years) and contain a lot of juvenile wood Juvenile wood is more susceptible to termite attack: Lukmandaru & Takahashi (2008): 8-year teak wood (Tectona grandis) was more susceptible to termite (Reticulitermes speratus) attack than teak 30 and 51 years.

7 Community Forest

8 Logs Production Logs Production 2010: 42.4 million m 3 54 % from plantation forest Industrial Plantation Forest 2011: 5.3 million ha Species: Mangium, Falcataria, Gmelina, Pulai Fast Growing Species Licenses Issued to Industrial Plantation for Social Forestry ( ): 1.2 million ha.

9 Wood from Plantation Harvested: 4-10 years (FGS) Planted tree: more juvenile wood Inferior in physical-mechanical properties Lower durability class Economic loss in 2000 (Yoshimura and Tsunoda, 2005): Indonesia USD million Wood from plantation is not preserved prior to use, increasing economic loss.

10 Young Teak Wood, Window Frame West Java, Oct 2011

11 WPC Preparation for Field Test in Bogor Macrotermes gilvus Termite

12 Test Period of 3-month Bogor, Indonesia

13 In-Ground Test, Southern Pine 3-month in Bogor

14 Particleboard PB from high-density wood was more resistant than lower density wood to subterranean termite attack (Hadi et al. 2011) The influence of adhesive type against termite attack (Weaver & Owen 1992).

15 Binderless Particleboard Binderless particle- & fiber-board researches Steam injection (Widyorini et al. 2005), Enzymatic activation (Widsten et al. 2004), Direct hot pressing (Hashim et al. 2011), and Oxidation treatment (Karlsson and Westermark 2002, Widsten et al. 2003) Binderless particleboards of some woods from community forest fulfill physical-mechanical properties SNI 2006 and JAS 2003 (Suhasman et al. 2010, 2011).

16 Internal Bond (Kgf cm -2 ) Internal Bond of Boards (Suhasman et al. 2011) Sengon Gmelina Mindi BP UF MF PF IC Adhesive Type

17 Activation Process with H2O2

18 Purpose of Study Resistance of binderless particleboards against termite attack Wood species: Sengon (Paraserianthes falcataria), Gmelina (Gmelina arborea), and Mindi (Melia azedarach) Termite Tests: Subterranean termite in laboratory Subterranean termite in ground test Dry wood termite in laboratory.

19 METHODS Particleboard Manufacturing Particle size: mesh Oxidation process: Sengon: 5 % H 2 O 2 (wood wt); 5% Fe 2 (SO 4 ) 3 (H 2 O 2 wt) Gmelina & Mindi: 15% H 2 O 2 ; 7.5% Fe 2 (SO 4 ) 3 Hot press: 180 C; 12 min.; 25 kg/cm 2 Conditioning: 8 months, MC PB 7-10%.

20 Conventional PB For comparison purpose: UF & MF particleboards 10% resin (ODW); hot press 120 C, 7 min., 25 kg/cm 2, conditioning Board size: 30 x 30 x 0.7 (cm); density target 0.75 g/cm 3.

21 1. Subterranean Termite Test Coptotermes curvignathus Holmgren PB: 2 x 2 x 0.7 (cm); Jam pot Each jam pot 200 g sand (25 % MC) 200 healthy and active worker termites Put in the dark room for four weeks MC of sand was kept Determined (5 replication) PB weight loss Termite mortality.

22 Subterranean Termite Test

23 Resistance Class ST, SNI Sampel Weight loss (%) Resistant class Very resistant <3.52 I Resistant II Moderate III Poor IV Very poor >18.94 V

24 2. In-Ground Test Particleboard 20 x 2 x 0.7 (cm): Placed horizontally between 2 plywood (2 cm thick) for 6 weeks Determined (5 replication) Wood failure degree. 24

25 In-Ground Test

26 Wood Failure Degree Sampel Condition Score 1 No damage 0 2 Slightly attack, 1-25 % failure 40 3 Moderately attack, % failure 70 4 Heavy attacked, % failure 90 5 Very heavy attack, % failure

27 3. Dry Wood Termite Test Cryptotermes cynocephalus Light Wood 5 x 2 x 0.7 (cm) On the center of it sample a glass tube (3 cm height by 1.8 cm diameter) was placed Each sample: 50 worker termites were put Put in the dark room for 12 weeks Determined (5 replication) PB weight loss Termite mortality.

28 Dry Wood Termite Test Wood Samples

29 Resistance Class DWT, SNI Sampel Weight loss (%) Resistant class Very resistant <2.0 I Resistant II Moderate III Poor IV Very poor >28.1 V

30 Data Analysis 3 x 3 factorial in completely randomized design was used to analyze the data; Wood sp (3): Sengon, Gmelina, Mindi PB type (3): Binderless, UF, MF Duncan s test was used for further analysis if the factor was significantly different at p < 5%.

31 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Wood species Density (g/cm 3 ) ST Class Sengon Gmelina Mindi

32 Subterranean Termite, Lab Weight Loss (%), ST, Lab BL UF MF Sengon Gmelina Mindi

33 Subterranean Termite, Lab 5 ST, Resistance Class Sengon Gmelina Mindi 1 0 BL UF MF Wood

34 Subterranean Termite, Lab Mortality (%), ST BL UF MF 84 Sengon Gmelina Mindi

35 In Ground Test Attack Degree, ST, In Ground Test BL UF MF 20 0 Sengon Gmelina Mindi

36 Dry Wood Termite Test Weight Loss (%), DWT BP UF MF Sengon Gmelina Mindi

37 Dry Wood Termite Test 4 DWT, Resistance Class BP UF MF 0 Sengon Gmelina Mindi

38 Dry Wood Termite Test 100 Mortality (%), DWT BL UF MF 88 Sengon Gmelina Mindi

39 Results of variance analysis Test Item Wood Board Interaction species (A) Type (B) (AB) ST Lab Wood weight loss ** ** ns Termite mortality ** ** ** ST Field Wood weight loss ** ** ** Termite mortality ** ** ** DWT Wood weight loss ns ns ns Termite mortality ns ns ns

40 Duncan s Test Factor Sub-Factor ST Lab Test ST In Ground Test Wood Sp. Sengon A D Gmelina B E Mindi B F Board Type Sengon C G Gmelina C H Mindi C H

41 CONCLUSION ST Lab & Field Tests: Low to High resistant: Sengon, Gmelina, Mindi (Wood density: 0.33; 0.42; 0.55) BL, UF & MF not different Field Test: UF & MF boards better than binderless board DWT: Wood sp & board type did not affect resistant.

42 Publication ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Suhasman S, YS Hadi, MY Massijaya, A Santoso Binderless Particleboard Resistance to Termite Attack. Forest Products J. 62(5): Sponsorship of the Indonesian Ministry of Education and Culture for Conducting the research through National Strategic Grant Facilitate presenting the paper in this seminar.

43 Thank You Very Much 18-Nov Bogor Agricultural University, Indonesia