4.7 Article

Measurement of the surface roughness of wood based materials used in furniture manufacture

Journal

MEASUREMENT
Volume 46, Issue 4, Pages 1482-1487

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.measurement.2012.11.041

Keywords

Roughness; Wood products; Stylus method; 3D method

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The objective of this work was to evaluate surface quality of wood based materials used to manufacture furniture units in Singapore. Various type commercially produced composite panels including particleboard, medium density fibreboard (MDF), plywood in addition to ten different solid wood species which are commonly used in furniture production were considered for the experiments. A stylus type profilometer and 3D image analyzer were employed to determine surface roughness of the samples. Medium density fibreboard (MDF) samples resulted in the smoothest surface with an across the sandmark average roughness (R-a) value of 5.07 mu m, while corresponding value for plywood specimens was 8.09 mu m among the composite panel samples. In the case of solid wood samples, measurements taken along and across the sandmark from the surface of the specimens measured by the stylus type profilometer, balau had the roughest surface with an R-a value of 9.85 mu m across the sandmark followed by beech and walnut. Pine specimens along with ash, cherry and nyatoh resulted in relatively smooth surface values. Correlation between measurements taken by two different methods, namely stylus and 3D scanning showed a good agreement with each other. Based on the findings in this work it appears that both methods can be successfully used to evaluate and to get objective numerical values on surface quality of these samples so that such initial data can be used as quality control tool to have more effective further manufacturing steps in furniture production. (C) 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available