Reducing the Surface Checking of Deck-Boards Exposed to Natural Weathering: Effects of Wood Species and Surface Profiling
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
REDUCING THE SURFACE CHECKING OF DECK-BOARDS EXPOSED TO NATURAL WEATHERING: EFFECTS OF WOOD SPECIES AND SURFACE PROFILING by Kenneth Jenkye Cheng B.Sc. (Wood Products Processing)., The University of British Columbia, 2010 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE in The Faculty of Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies (Forestry) THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA (Vancouver) April 2015 ©Kenneth Jenkye Cheng, 2015 Abstract Surface checking is a defect in wood decking that is highly disliked by consumers. Surface checking can be reduced by selecting species that are more resistant to checking, or profiling deck-boards with a series of V(rib) or U(ripple) shaped grooves. Most literature on checking of decking focuses on species that are already used as exterior products. This provides an opportunity to investigate the use of other under-utilized species as deck-boards. Surface profiling has been applied to deck-boards to reduce checking, but there is little research on why it is effective. I hypothesize that both species and the geometry of surface profiles will significantly influence checking of deck-boards exposed to natural weathering. To test this hypothesis I exposed deck-boards made from 9 untreated softwoods and 8 untreated hardwoods outside for one year and measured the checking of the boards. None of the species performed as well as western red cedar and ipe, durable species that resist checking. However, some diffuse porous hardwoods performed quite well and further improvements might be achieved with chemical or physical treatments. Profilometry was used to classify and identify the geometry of commercially profiled deck-boards. The ratio of the surface grooves (R1) to those of peaks (R2) classified profiles into two categories mentioned in the literature (rib and ripple). A new category of profile (ribble) was also identified that had intermediate characteristics of both rib and ripple profiles. New profiles with various R1/R2 and height to width (H/W) ratios of profile peaks and grooves were tested to examine the effect of profile geometry on the checking of Pacific silver fir boards exposed to natural weathering. Profiling reduced the width of checks but increased cupping of the boards. There was no consistent trend of R1/R2 and H/W ratios on checking, but rib profiles were better than ribble or ripple profiles at restricting checks. Therefore, I conclude that species and profile geometry influence checking. Furthermore, some of the rib profiles could be used with diffuse porous hardwoods and some softwoods to enable them to compete more effectively with decking made from durable wood species or wood plastic composites. ii Preface Parts of Chapter 4 were presented as a poster at the American Wood Protection Association 110th Annual Meeting held in Newport Beach, California in 2014 under the tile “Use of confocal profilometry to describe, classify, and identify profiled decking”. I conducted all of the experimental research described and discussed in the poster, designed the initial layout of the poster, and presented the results at the conference. My co-author Dr. Philip D. Evans helped with the design of the experiment described in the poster and also with the layout of the poster. Parts of Chapter 5 were presented at the Canadian Wood Preservation Association 35th Annual Meeting held in Vancouver in 2014 under the title: “Optimizing profiling to reduce the checking of Pacific silver fir decking”. I conducted the experimental research, wrote the manuscript and presented the results at the conference. My co-author Dr. Philip D. Evans helped with the experimental design, statistical analyses and edited the final manuscript. The citation for the paper is: Cheng, K., Evans, P.D. (2014). Optimizing profiling to reduce the checking of Pacific silver fir decking. Proceedings of the Thirty-Fifth Annual Meeting of the Canadian Wood Preservation Association (Oct. 28-29), Vancouver, B.C., Canada, 18 pp. iii Table of Contents Abstract ...................................................................................................................................... ii Preface ....................................................................................................................................... iii Table of Contents ....................................................................................................................... iv List of Tables ............................................................................................................................... x List of Figures ............................................................................................................................. xi Acknowledgments ..................................................................................................................... xx Dedication ................................................................................................................................ xxi Chapter 1 : General Introduction .................................................................................................1 1.1 Wood decking ...................................................................................................................1 1.2 Surface checking ................................................................................................................4 1.3 Aim, hypothesis and significance .......................................................................................5 1.4 Study outline .....................................................................................................................5 Chapter 2 : Literature Review ......................................................................................................7 2.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................7 2.2 Checking ............................................................................................................................8 2.2.1 Definitions ..................................................................................................................8 2.2.2 Mechanism (why checks form) .................................................................................12 2.3 Factors affecting checking ...............................................................................................16 2.3.1 Wood microstructure ...............................................................................................16 2.3.2 Wood species ...........................................................................................................19 2.3.2.1 Softwoods ...................................................................................................................... 20 2.3.2.2 Hardwoods ..................................................................................................................... 22 2.3.3 Growth ring orientation ............................................................................................26 2.3.3.1 Radial, tangential, rift and double rift ............................................................................. 26 2.3.3.2 Concave and convex growth ring orientations ................................................................ 28 iv 2.3.4 Wood quality (juvenile v mature wood/density and grain angle etc.) ........................29 2.3.4.1 Density ........................................................................................................................... 29 2.3.4.2 The pith juvenile/mature wood ...................................................................................... 30 2.3.4.3 Grain angle ..................................................................................................................... 31 2.3.5 Wood defects (knots, compression wood etc.) .........................................................32 2.3.6 Weathering ...............................................................................................................35 2.4 Attempts to reduce checking ...........................................................................................37 2.4.1 Wood selection .........................................................................................................37 2.4.2 Center-boring ...........................................................................................................37 2.3.3 Planing and machining ..............................................................................................38 2.4.3 Profiling ....................................................................................................................40 2.4.3.1 History of surface grooving ............................................................................................. 40 2.4.3.2 Surface profiling of deck-boards ..................................................................................... 47 2.4.4 Kerfing ......................................................................................................................53 2.4.4.1 Square posts and rails ..................................................................................................... 54 2.4.4.2 Logs and round poles...................................................................................................... 54 2.4.4.3 Kerfing used in drying ....................................................................................................