ANALYSIS OF FACTORS WHICH DETERMINE THE USE OF PARTICLEBOARD

AND MDF AS RAW MATERIAL FOR FURNITURE MANUFACTURING

Dritan Ajdinaj1, Armond Halebi1

1
Agricultural University, Tirana, R. of Albania, Faculty of Forestry Sciences,
dajdinaj@ubt.edu.al

ABSTRACT

Albanian industry of furniture manufacturing uses massively particleboards (Pb) and medium
density fibreboards (MDF) as raw materials, whose imports reached a value of $ 8.2 million in
2009. A study was carried out to analyze he properties that determine the use of these panels in
joinery. Tests included the most important physical and mechanical-technological properties.
The study was focused on 18 mm thickness particleboard and 19 mm MDF. The whole process
of panels sampling, test pieces preparation and their testing was performed according to EN
standards. Results showed that panels fulfilled quality requirements specified by European
standards. Bending strength of particleboards resulted 87% higher than EN reference value,
whereas MDF about 50%. Tensile strength perpendicular to board’s plane resulted 23% higher
than the minimum limit for particleboard and 26% for MDF. Unlike veneer, which increased
somewhat mechanical properties of the board, melamine didn’t present any positive impact on its
properties. MDF presented higher capability in screw holding than particleboard. Screw holding
resistance in edge wasn’t satisfactory for particleboard, but in plane presented values which must
be taken into consideration. Quality of melamine lamination in particleboard resulted higher than
veneer overlaying in MDF.
Keywords: particleboard, MDF, properties, furniture.

1 INTRODUCTION

As key elements of furniture performance can be mention the resistance, solidity, weight, and its
functionality. These elements are determined by the quality of raw materials, as well as by
processing and assembling.
Furniture’s ability to bear his weight and the weight of items placed on / in it depends directly on
the resistance in static bending of the material from which it is built.
Furniture to be solid needs connections of its constituent elements to be more resistant. The
quality of connection depends on the quality of material jointed together, as well as the quality of
fastening element, Halebi (2006). Referring to time extension, the connection’s quality depends
on maintaining the original dimensions of jointed parts.
In case of dowel joints in particleboards (Pb), bonding of board’s layers with each other presents
a great importance. Weak resistance of this bonding causes destruction of the board where is
mounted the fastening element, when a load is applied. As a consequence, the connection is
destroyed and the furniture too. In this context information on tensile strength perpendicular to
board’s plane is very valuable, Semple et al. (2005).
With regard to screw connection applied extensively in handicraft furniture manufacture,
information on wood material ability to hold screw is of crucial importance to ensure a
connection with acceptable quality.
During its life the furniture is subject of different transport operations. In order its transportation
to be easy and economical the furniture should be lightweight. The majority of constituent
materials in furniture are wood based materials. As light is the wood material, as light is the
weight of furniture. Weight indicator of material is its density, a qualitative parameter of physical
nature to determine the furniture quality.
In terms of appearance and functionality of furniture, these depend on the quality of design and
appearances of its own material used for its production, and are mainly related to ability of
designers.
Currently, Albanian manufacturing furniture industry use as raw materials massively
particleboards and medium density fibreboards (MDF), which have replaced the solid wood and
plywood, Ajdinaj (2006). Imported Pb and MDF by Albanian market reached a value of $ 8.2
million in 2009, and most of them were imported from Italy, Greece and Bulgaria, FAO (2010).
In this context the knowledge and analysis of properties, which in itself are factors that determine
the use of these panels in joinery, shall form the aim of our study.

2 MATERIAL AND METHOD

Analyses included a sufficient number of tests for significant physical, mechanical and
technological properties of Pb and MDF, which are intended for use in normal conditions. These
tests provided sufficient information for all Albanian furniture manufacturers who used these
wood based panels as raw materials.
In Table 1 are presented tests carried out during the study accompanied by relevant EN
methodological standards.
Referring to aim of the study, the performed tests were classified as comparative tests having as
reference point the European classifier standards in power.

Table 1 – Typology of tests

Test Pb MDF Standard
Physical tests
Density   EN 323
Swelling during water immersion   EN 317
Water absorption -  ISO769
Mechanical and technological tests
Static bending strength and modulus of elasticity   EN 310
Tensile strength perpendicular to board’s plane   EN 319
Melamine surface soundness (peeling resistance)  - EN 311
Veneer surface soundness (peeling resistance) -  EN 311
Screw holding resistance   EN 320

2.1 Preparation of samples

The study was focused on Pb 18 mm thick and MDF 19 mm thick, which commonly are used as
raw material for furniture production in Albania. Panels were provided by the company SHAGA,
one of the major trading and manufacturing of furniture companies in the country. The selection
of panels to be assessed as well as the selection and dimensions of samples prepared from these
panels was performed according to procedures specified by the standards EN 326-1 and EN 326-
3. The minimum quantity of samples for each type of tests was determined according to the
standard EN 326-1.
In Table 2 are presented the minimum numbers of samples referring to respective tests. With
regard to tests which were not shown in table, the minimum number of samples was given by the
relevant methodological standard.
To determine those properties that vary according to two main directions of panel’s plane
(bending), two sets of samples were cut off according to longitudinal and perpendicular
directions of the panel. Samples were cut off according to dimensions specified by the relevant
standards. During preparation of samples was taken into account that minimum distance between
two samples belonging to the same test should be 100 [mm].

Table 2 – Number of samples

Test Standard Number of samples
Determination of density EN 323
Determination of static bending strength 6
EN 310
and modulus of elasticity
Swelling after immersion in water EN 317
Tensile strength perpendicular to board’s 8
EN 319
plane

2.2 Physical tests

With regard to density, samples were prepared with size 50 × 50 mm. After conditioning, they
were weight to 0.01 g accuracy and were measured in thickness up to 0.05 mm and other sizes up
to 0.1 mm accuracy, according to EN 325 standard procedures. Density was calculated for each
m
sample mean formula D   10 6 kg/m3, where m was the mass of sample in g and b1,
b1  b2  t
b2 and t were dimensions and thickness of the sample in mm.
Swelling was pointed out by measuring the increase in % of sample’s thickness after immersion
t t
in water for 24 hours, mean formula Gt  2 1  100 , where t1 and t2 thickness of the sample
t1
before and after immersion in water, in mm. Samples were prepared in square shape with
dimension 50 ± 1 mm and thickness was measured to the points of diagonals intersection by
means of micrometer with 0.01 mm accuracy.
Water absorption was calculated for samples with dimensions 100 ± 1 mm, mean formula
p  p1
Tu  2  100 %, where p1 and p2 were sample weights in g before and after 24 hour
p1
immersion in water.

2.3 Mechanical Tests

Determination of static bending strength and modulus of elasticity to the plane was performed
according to standard EN 310. The principle of test consisted that strength and modulus of
elasticity in bending were determined under the action of a load on the middle of sample of
nominal thickness not less than 3 mm, positioned on two supports. Bending strength was
calculated mean the ratio of bending momentum (M) of maximal load (Fmax) in transverse
section of the sample; while modulus of elasticity was calculated mean the linear curve load -
deformation. The result corresponded to visible elasticity module and not that real one, because
the measurement was performed under the influence of bending and shear effects.
Knowing the value of modulus of elasticity allows us to know what relation between load and
relative deformation should be, remaining always within the linear proportionality load -
deformation.
Tests were performed mean mechanical testing machine of maximal load up to 20 tons
(Controlab, FRANCE), equipped with transdutor for measuring of samples deformation in the
middle of the distance between two supports with accuracy 0.1 mm and the other one of pressure
with accuracy measuring of 1% (Figure 1).
Samples were prepared from the same panel before and after laminating (Pb) or veneering
(MDF), 50 ± 1 mm in width and length l  20t  50 mm, where t was thickness of the panel in
mm.
3F  l
The maximum bending strength was calculated mean formula f m  max 2 1 N/mm2, where
2b  t
Fmax was the force of sample’s destruction in N, l1 was the distance between two supports in
mm, b and t were width and thickness of the sample in mm.
l1  ( F2  F1 )
3
The modulus of elasticity for each sample was calculated mean formula E m 
4b  t 3  (a 2  a1 )
N/mm2, where F2-F1 was increase of force according to straight line of load-deformation graphic
in N and a2 – a1 bending radius corresponding to F2-F1 in mm (Figure 2). In our case we referred
to values respectively F1 = 10% Fmax and F2 = 40% Fmax.

Fig. 1 – Universal mechanical testing machine Fig.2 - Load – deformation curve

within elastic deformation

Tensile strength perpendicular to board’s plane was measured according to EN 319 standard
procedure. The principle of measurement consisted in evaluation of tensile strength’s peak
perpendicular to surface of the sample, on which a uniform traction force was applied, from
starting of force until to destruction of the sample. The strength in this case was determined by
the ratio between maximum load and surface sample. It should specify that this analyse provides
information on shear strength of inner section of panel (for three layered Pb - middle layer) and
not for surfaces layers of the panel.
For this test was used the same mechanical test machine as in the case of static bending, realising
appropriate adaptations. Samples were cut off in square shape with dimension 50 ± 1 mm. Each
sample was bonded in both sides with oak blocks mean epoxy glue. After adhesion, samples
were conditioned for 24 hours and were tested. Tensile strength perpendicular to panel’s plane,
F
expressed in N/mm2, was calculated by formula f T  max , where Fmax was the destruction in N
ab
and a, b were respectively the length and width of the sample in mm.
The overlaying test strength was performed according to standard EN 311 and consisted in
measurement of the force needed to pull off a steel axe glued on overlaying panel surface,
evaluating so the quality of adhesion between surface’s particles or fibres and overlaying
material.
There were cut off 10 test pieces with dimensions 50 × 50 mm from each sample. Samples were
taken from overlaying panels, respectively:
- veneered MDF (company "ICA-ALBANIA");
Veneer thickness 0.6 mm, used glue urea formaldehyde (UF Kaurit). Temperature applied
during hot pressing was 130 ºC, time pressing 1 minute. Gauge pressure applied by press, 250
bar.
- melamine Pb (company "FIRSTWOOD");
Melamine paper thickness and density respectively 0.2 mm and 178 g/m2. Temperature applied
during hot pressing was 198 ºC, time pressing 33 seconds. Gauge pressure applied by short
cycle press, 250 bar.
In surfaces of test pieces were opened circular channels with inner diameter 35.7 mm. The
surface of circular was 1000 mm2 and depth of channel 0.3 ± 0.1 mm. Five channels were
opened in upper surfaces and other fives in opposite ones. In limited areas of channels steel axis
were glued (Figure 3). For technical reason dealing with test machine accessories, the axis length
was not 26 mm, as specified to the standard, but 67 mm. Before adhesion, on axis surface was
uniformly distributed an amount acrylic glue with two components. These glues were classified
as the strongest glues recognized, Shields (1984). The axis was pressured on circular surface for
more than 12 hours mean a hand grip device, in order to provide the maximum strength of
adhesion.
After hardening of glue tests were carried out mean mechanical test machine (Figure 4).
Overlaying strength (peeling resistance), expressed in N/mm2 was calculated mean formula
F
S  max , where Fmax was destruction force in N and A circular area, 1000 mm2.
A
Axial screw holding resistance was performed according to standard EN 320, for surface and
edge. It should be noted that the standard was intended to be applied only on fibreboards, leaving
to be implied that the use of screws in Pb fastenings is not preferred. But, based on the situation
in Albania where screws fastenings of Pb are massively applied to handicraft furniture
manufacturing, and noting that some certified laboratories in EU (CATAS etc.) apply this
standard for Pb, was judged reasonable that Pb to be studied as well.
Screw holding resistance of surface and edges was determined by measuring the force required
to pull off a specified screw from the sample of the panel. Holding resistance of edges was
 Fig. 3 – Glued axis on test piece Fig. 4 – Testing

determined for panels of 15 mm thickness or greater. To perform this test was used the same
mechanical test machine used for other tests, equipped with the appropriate accessories, which
capture the screw to the bottom surface of its head and keep the sample fixed.
There were prepared 8 square shape samples (test pieces) with dimension 75±1 mm. After holes
were opened, screws were mounted. The holes had diameter 2.7±0.1 mm and 19 ± 1 mm depth,
perpendicular to sample surface, to the centre of the surface and to the mid-point of the edge.
Steel screws were used with nominal dimensions 4.2 x 38 mm, with screw-thread n° ST 4.2,
according to ISO 1478 and with 1.4 mm step fillet. Screws were inserted into the samples 15±0.5
mm. For each sample were performed 3 measurements, 1 for surface and 2 for edges respectively
perpendicular to each-other. With regard to the edges the mean value of two individually
measurements values was calculated.

3 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Mechanical testing data were received through LabView software and were processed in Excel.
In Table 3 are presented results of laboratory tests (in parentheses standard deviations values are
presented).

Table 3 – Results of laboratory tests

Pb MDF
Type of test Unit
not laminated laminated not veneered veneered
Density kg/m3 643 (25.4) 638 (22.5) 759 (18.4) 762 (19.8)
Swelling (24 hours) % 11.3 (1.9) 11.2 (2.1) 10.2 (1.8) 10.8 (1.6)
Water absorption (24
% - - 14.7 (0.22) 14.1 (0.38)
hours)
Static bending strength N/mm2 24.3 (6.6) 23.8 (7.6) 29.4 (4.4) 35 (5.8)
Modulus of elasticity N/mm2 2212 (436) 2276 (312) 2909 (601) 3358 (737)
Tensile strength  to
N/mm2 0.43 (0.11) - 0.69 (0.12) -
plane
Overlaying strength N/mm2 1.72 (0.026) 1.53 (0.024)
Surface screw holding N 1346 (239) - 1638 (287) -
Edge screws holding N 693 (201) 1204 (223)
At first sight the results show that both types of studied boards have physical and mechanical
parameters within limits specified by EN reference standards. An exception exists for swelling of
Pb, for which the reference standard EN 312 does not give any reference value.
It is noted that some features represent significant higher values to the specified limits, especially
those of mechanical properties. Pb static bending strength is about 87% higher than the minimum
reference value, while for MDF about 50%. Modulus of elasticity results about 40% higher than
the reference values for Pb and 30% higher for MDF. The same can be said even for values of
tensile strength perpendicular to surface, where Pb appears to be 23% more resistant than the
reference threshold, while MDF 26%.
Non laminated Pb presents almost the same swelling as that laminated one, whereas veneered
MDF gives a swelling value 6% higher than non veneered one. Higher swelling of veneered
MDF can be explained that veneer layers are swelled something more than panel, although it
ought to be admitted that the difference is so small that it can be considered as deviation of the
average value of swelling of panel itself.
Laminated Pb does not present any improvement of mechanical properties compared with non
laminated one. In this case this phenomenon is related to the nature of overlaying material, which
after hot pressing presents low resistance by mechanical viewpoint (it is very brittle). In a
different way veneering is presented. It increases the panel’s bending strength about 19% and its
modulus of elasticity 15%. Veneer, serving as reinforcing layer, improves bending strength of
the panel, although our data are lower than those of literature, Norvydas and Minelga (2006).
With regard to screws holding resistance MDF stay significantly higher than Pb, especially for
edge case. MDF surface screws holding resistance is about 22% higher than that of Pb and in
edge about 74% higher. This is explained by the fact that besides density, MDF has also more
homogeneous structure, which makes possible a greater contact surface panel-screw than in Pb,
causing so a greater relation force, Wang et al. (2007). Notable difference exists between surface
and edge, where for Pb, the edge screws holding resistance is almost half of the surface one. In
case of MDF this difference is 36%.
Overlaying strength is different to both panels. Laminated Pb presents a value 12% higher than
veneered MDF. For both panel’s type the overlaying strength appears to be good quality, because
the destruction of all test pieces happen only in surface layers of the panel. Based on this fact, we
can say that our values may also be used as an indicator for strength of surface layers of studied
panels.

4 CONCLUSIONS

The results presented above, although referring to only a part of panels used for furniture
manufacturing in Albania, provide useful information regarding to qualitative parameters of Pb
and MDF.
From tests resulted that studied panels are within qualitative requirements specified by European
reference standards. Panels are presented qualitative, especially to mechanical properties.
Otherwise to veneering, which improves somewhat mechanical properties of the panel,
melamine does not make any positive impact on its properties. MDF is presented more
qualitative than Pb in screw holding resistance. Edge screw holding resistance of Pb does not
appear a good quality, although the surface screw holding must be taken into consideration. The
overlaying quality of Pb results higher than MDF.
We can say that the use of qualitative wood based panels, combined with a modern technology
and appropriate marketing tools, has provided to some Albanian furniture manufacturing
companies’ success in international market.

5 REFERENCES

Ajdinaj, D., 2006, Resources and utilization possibilities of raw material for production of wood
based panels, PhD thesis, Faculty of Forestry Sciences, Tirana.

EN 310, 1993, Wood-based panels - Determination of modulus of elasticity in bending and of

bending strength, European Committee for Standardization, Brussels.

EN 311, 2002, Wood-based panels - Surface soundness - Test method, European Committee for
Standardization, Brussels.

EN 317, 1993, Particleboards and fibreboards - Determination of swelling in thickness after

immersion in water, European Committee for Standardization, Brussels.

EN 319, 1993, Particleboards and fibreboards - Determination of tensile strength perpendicular

to the plane of the board, European Committee for Standardization, Brussels.

EN 320, 1993, Fibreboards - Determination of resistance to axial withdrawal of screws,

European Committee for Standardization, Brussels.

EN 323, 1993, Wood-based panels - Determination of density, European Committee for

Standardization, Brussels.

EN 325, 1993, Wood-based panels - Determination of dimensions of test pieces, European

Committee for Standardization, Brussels.

EN 326-1, 1994, Wood-based panels – Sampling, cutting and inspection - Part 1: Sampling and
cutting of test pieces and expression of test results, European Committee for Standardization,
Brussels.

EN 326-3, 2003, Wood-based panels – Sampling, cutting and inspection - Part 3: Inspection of
an isolated lot of panels, European Committee for Standardization, Brussels.

Halebi, A., 2006, Study on the possibility of choice and application of accessories in the
manufacture of furniture, MsC thesis, Faculty of Forestry Sciences, Tirana.

ISO 769, 1972, Fibreboards - Determination of water absorption after 24 hours immersion,
International Standard Organization, Geneva.

Norvydas, V., Minelga, D., 2006, Strength and stiffness properties of furniture panels covered
with different coatings, In: Materials Science, 12(4), Proceedings of the National Conference
“Materials Engineering”, Kaunas, Lithuania, pp 328-332.
Semple, K., Sackey, E., Park, H., Smith, G., 2005, Properties survey of furniture grade
particleboard, Part 2- MS and M2 grade comparison and a practical in-situ test for internal bond
strength, In: Forest Products Soc., 59th International Convention, Quebec City.

Shields, J., 1984, Adhesives handbook, 3rd edition, Butterworth & Co (Publishers) Ltd., Oxford.

Wang, X., Salenikovich, A., Mohammad, M., 2007, Localized density effects on fastener holding
capacities in wood-based panels, Forest Products Journal, 57(1/2), pp 103-109.

http://faostat.fao.org