The fundamental factors responsible for the complexities in adhesive bonding of preservative-treated wood are predominantly wood species, preservative composition, and adhesive system. It is post-effect of these factors that process variables such as assembly times and bonding pressure exert secondary influences on adhesive-bond development in preservative-treated laminates. Hence, this study investigated the effect of copper azole (CA) and disodium octaborate tetrahydrate (DOT) impregnations on E. grandis heartwood (HW) and sapwood (SW) bonding with melamine–urea–formaldehyde and polyurethane adhesives. Based on the adhesives and bonding conditions investigated, the CA and DOT-treated E. grandis laminates do not satisfy at least one of the shear strength and delamination requirements according to EN 14080:2013. Contrary to delamination, shear strength was significantly affected by the HW–SW difference. This study established the basis for further considerations on adapting bonding conditions for improved adhesive-bond performance in CA and DOT-treated E. grandis laminates towards manufacturing durable hardwood composite for tropical and subtropical environments.
AladeAA.2021. An investigation into the effect of durability treatment on adhesive bonding of Eucalyptus grandis wood [E-theses/E-dissertations]. Stellenbosch, South Africa: Stellenbosch University. https://scholar.sun.ac.za.
2.
AladeAA, NaghizadehZ, WesselsCB.2021. A new method for estimating wood failure percentage in adhesive-bonded shear specimens. Int J Adhes Adhes. 112:103028. doi:10.1016/j.ijadhadh.2021.103028.
3.
AladeAA, NaghizadehZ, WesselsCB, StolzeH, MilitzH.2021. Adhesion performance of melamine-urea–formaldehyde joints of copper azole-treated Eucalyptus grandis at varied bonding process conditions. Construction and Building Materials. 314(Part A). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.125682.
4.
AladeAA, NaghizadehZ, WesselsCB, TyhodaL.2021. A review of the effects of wood preservative impregnation on adhesive bonding and joint performance. J Adhes Sci Technol. https://doi.org/10.1080/01694243.2021.1981651.
5.
AlamjuriRH, ZaidonA, AboodF, AnwarUMK.2010. Adhesion and bonding characteristics of preservative-treated bamboo (Gigantochloa scortechinii) laminates. J Appl Sci. 10:1435–1441.
6.
AliponMA, GarciaCM, BondadEO.2018. Glue and preservative effects on the properties and durability of engineered bamboo boards. Philipp J Sci. 147:601–616.
7.
ASTM D5266-99. 2005. Standard Practice for Estimating the Percentage of Wood Failure in Adhesive Bonded Joints. https://doi.org/10.1520/D5266-99R05.
8.
ASTM D905 – 08. 2008. Standard test method for strength properties of adhesive bonds in shear by compression loading. 5. doi:10.1520/D0905-08E01.
9.
AydinI, ColakogluG.2007. Variation in surface roughness, wettability and some plywood properties after preservative treatment with boron compounds. Build Environ. 42:3837–3840. doi:10.1016/j.buildenv.2006.11.009.
10.
CaldeiraF.2010. Boron in wood preservation: a review in its physico-chemical aspects. Silva Lusit. 18:179–196.
11.
Carlito CalilN, André LuisC, Francisco Antonio RoccoL, Carlito CalilJ.2014. Analysis of specie – treatment - adhesive combinations for glulam purpose. Int J Mater Eng. 4:41–47. doi:10.5923/j.ijme.20140401.06.
12.
ChenS, HongX, HarrisCJ.2010. Regression based D-optimality experimental design for sparse kernel density estimation. Neurocomputing. 73:727–739. doi:10.1016/J.NEUCOM.2009.11.002.
13.
CraffordPL, WesselsCB.2016. The potential of young, Green finger-jointed Eucalyptus grandis lumber for roof truss manufacturing. South For J For Sci. 78:61–71. doi:10.2989/20702620.2015.1108618.
14.
DietschP, TannertT.2015. Assessing the integrity of glued-laminated timber elements. Constr Build Mater. 101:1259–1270. doi:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2015.06.064.
15.
DugmoreM, NocettiM, BrunettiM, NaghizadehZ, WesselsCB.2019. Bonding quality of cross-laminated timber: evaluation of test methods on Eucalyptus grandis panels. Constr Build Mater. 211:217–227. doi:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.03.240.
16.
EN 14080:2013. 2014. Timber structures – glued laminated timber and glued solid timber – requirements. European Committee for Standardization, Brussels: BSI Stand. Publ., 1–110.
17.
FariaDL, CruzTM, DiasMC, DuartePJ, MendesLM, Guimarães JuniorJB.2020. Physical and mechanical behavior of glulam beams produced with rubberwood treated with preservatives. Ciência e Agrotecnologia. 44:e012020. doi:10.1590/1413-7054202044012020.
18.
FreemanMH, McIntyreCR.2008. A comprehensive review of copper-based wood preservatives. For Prod J. 58:6–27.
19.
FrihartCR.2003. Interaction of copper wood preservatives and adhesives. Adhesion Society, Inc. 26th Annual meeting of adhesion fundamentals: from molecules to mechanisms and modeling, pp. 244–245. https://www.fpl.fs.fed.us/documnts/pdf2003/friha03a.pdf.
20.
GasparF, CruzH, GomesA, NunesL.2010. Production of glued laminated timber with copper azole treated maritime pine. Eur J Wood Wood Prod. 68:207–218. doi:10.1007/s00107-009-0373-6.
21.
GithiomiJK, DouglasE.2012. Analysis of heartwood – sapwood demarcation methods and variation of sapwood and heartwood within and between 15 year old plantation grown Eucalyptus regnans. Int J Appl Sci Technol. 2:63–70.
22.
GonyaANS.2020. An investigation into shrinkage and collapse behavior of Eucalyptus grandis and Eucalyptus grandis x urophylla wood [E-theses/E-dissertations]. Stellenbosch, South Africa: Stellenbosch University. https://scholar.sun.ac.za.
23.
GuttorpP, LindgrenG.2009. Karl Pearson and the Scandinavian school of statistics. Int Stat Rev. 77:64–71. doi:10.1111/J.1751-5823.2009.00069.X.
24.
HumarM, ŽlindraD, PohlevenF.2007. Influence of wood species, treatment method and biocides concentration on leaching of copper-ethanolamine preservatives. Build Environ. 42:578–583. doi:10.1016/j.buildenv.2005.09.023.
25.
LeeD, LeeMJ, SonD-W, ParkB-D.2006. Adhesive performance of woods treated with alternative preservatives. Wood Sci Technol. 40:228–236. doi:10.1007/s00226-005-0036-7.
26.
LimH, TripathiS, TangJD.2020. Bonding performance of adhesive systems for cross-laminated timber treated with micronized copper azole type C (MCA-C). Constr Build Mater. 232:117208. doi:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.117208.
27.
LorenzLF, FrihartC.2006. Adhesive bonding of wood treated with ACQ and copper azole preservatives. For Prod J. 56:90–93.
28.
MiyazakiJ, NakanoT.2002. Effects of wood preservatives on adhesive properties II. Curing reaction of resorcinol-formaldehyde resin with Cu. J Japan Wood Res Soc. 48:178–183.
29.
MiyazakiJ, NakanoT, HirabayashiY, KishinoM.1999. Effects of wood preservatives on adhesive properties of phenol-resorcinol-formaldehyde resin. Mokuzai Gakkaishi. 45:34–41.
30.
Mosayebi OmshiE, ShemehsavarS.2018. Optimal design for accelerated degradation test based on D-optimality. Iran J Sci Technol Trans A Sci. 434(43):1811–1818. doi:10.1007/S40995-018-0633-6.
31.
ÖzçifçiA.2006. Effects of boron compounds on the bonding strength of phenol-formaldehyde and melamine-formaldehyde adhesives to impregnated wood materials. J Adhes Sci Technol. 20:1147–1153. doi:10.1163/156856106777890590.
32.
ÖzçifçiA, ÖrsY, UysalB.2007. Determination of some physical and mechanical properties of laminated veneer lumber impregnated with boron compounds. J Appl Polym Sci. 105:2218–2224. doi:10.1002/app.26217.
33.
PeyloA, WilleitnerH.. 1999. Five years of boron leaching.In: The International Research Group on Wood Preservation. June 6-11, Rosenheim, Germany; IRG/WP/99-30195.
34.
PoljanšekI, FabjanE, ModercD, KukanjaD.2014. The effect of free isocyanate content on properties of one component urethane adhesive. Int J Adhes Adhes. 51:87–94. doi:10.1016/j.ijadhadh.2014.02.012.
PrinsAC.2021. Non-destructive methods for predicting sawn lumber properties from young, standing Eucalyptus grandis and Eucalyptus grandis X urophylla trees. Stellenbosch, South Africa: Stellenbosch University. https://scholar.sun.ac.za.
37.
RedheM, ForsbergJ, JanssonT, MarklundPO, NilssonL.2002. Using the response surface methodology and the D-optimality criterion in crashworthiness related problems. Struct Multidiscip Optim. 24(24):185–194. doi:10.1007/S00158-002-0228-9.
38.
RuddickJNR, XieC, HerringFG.2001. Fixation of amine copper preservatives. Part 1. Reaction of vanillin, a lignin model compound with monoethanolamine copper sulphate solution. Holzforschung. 55:585–589. doi:10.1515/HF.2001.095.
39.
SegundinhoPGdA, NetoCC, DiasAA, JúniorCC, ChristoforoAL.2014. Evaluation of Brazilian reforestation species in glulam beams before and after preservative chemical treatments. Int J Mater Eng. 4:192–195. doi:10.5923/j.ijme.20140406.02.
40.
ŠernekM.2002. Comparative analysis of inactivated wood surface. Faculty of the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University. doi:10.1515/HF.2004.004.
41.
ShuklaSR, KamdemDP.2012. Effect of copper based preservatives treatment of the properties of southern pine LVL. Constr Build Mater. 34:593–601. doi:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2012.02.009.
42.
ShuklaSR, KamdemDP.2020. Properties of red maple laminated veneer lumber impregnated with waterborne micronized and two soluble copper formulations. Wood Mater Sci Eng. 15:64–75. doi:10.1080/17480272.2018.1474250.
43.
SikoraKS, McpolinDO, HarteAM.2016. Shear strength and durability testing of adhesive bonds in cross-laminated timber. J Adhes. 92:758–777. doi:10.1080/00218464.2015.1094391.
44.
TemizA, AkbasS, AydinI, DemirkirC.2016. The effect of plasma treatment on mechanical properties, surface roughness and durability of plywood treated with copper-based wood preservatives. Wood Sci Technol. 50:179–191. doi:10.1007/s00226-015-0773-1.
45.
VickCB.1990. Adhesion of phenol-formaldehyde resin to waterborne emulsion preservatives in aspen veneer. For Prod J. 40:25–30.
46.
VickCB, De GrootRC, YoungquistJ.1990. Compatibility of nonacidic waterborne preservatives with phenol-formaldehyde adhesive, For Prod J. 40:16–22.
47.
WangJY, StirlingR, MorrisPI, TaylorA, LloydJ, KirkerG, LebowS, MankowskiME, BarnesHM, MorrellJ.2018. Durability of mass timber structures: a review of the biological risks. Wood Fiber Sci. 50:110–127. doi:10.22382/wfs-2018-045.
48.
WelchBL.1951. On the comparison of several mean values: an alternative approach. Biometrika. 38:330–336. doi:10.2307/2332579.
49.
WesselsCB, NocettiM, BrunettiM, CraffordPL, PröllerM, DugmoreMK, PagelC, LennerR, NaghizadehZ.2020. Green-glued engineered products from fast growing Eucalyptus trees: a review. Eur J Wood Wood Prod. 78:933–940. doi:10.1007/s00107-020-01553-6.
50.
YangT-H, LinC-H, WangS-Y, LinF-C.2012. Effects of ACQ preservative treatment on the mechanical properties of hardwood glulam. Eur J Wood Wood Prod. 70:557–564. doi:10.1007/s00107-011-0584-5.
51.
YeesaP-O, SrisuradetchaiP, BorkowskiJJ.2019. A weighted D-optimality criterion for constructing model-robust designs in the presence of block effects. Songklanakarin J Sci Technol. 42(6):1259–1273.
52.
YusohAS, Md TahirP, Anwar UyupMK, LeeSH, HusainH, KhaidzirMO.2021. Effect of wood species, clamping pressure and glue spread rate on the bonding properties of cross-laminated timber (CLT) manufactured from tropical hardwoods. Constr Build Mater. 273:121721. doi:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.121721.
53.
ZhangJ, KamdemDP.2000. Interaction of copper-amine with southern pine: retention and migration. Wood Fiber Sci. 32:332–339.
