4.6 Article

Particle size analysis of airborne wood dust produced from sawing thermally modified wood

Journal

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF WOOD AND WOOD PRODUCTS
Volume 77, Issue 2, Pages 211-218

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00107-019-01385-z

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. US Department of Agriculture, Wood Education and Resource Center [15-DG-11420004-082]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Thermal modification imparts desirable properties in wood, including increased dimensional stability and greater resistance to fungal decay. While there is a substantial amount of performance data for thermally modified wood, there is little data available regarding the airborne particle size distribution of dust produced when processing thermally modified wood using standard machining equipment. Therefore, utilizing a Micro-Orifice Uniform Deposit Impactor, this research analyzed the size distribution of airborne particles produced when processing 170 degrees C thermally modified yellow poplar, red maple, white ash, aspen, and balsam fir on an industrial table saw. Ultimately, the aim of this research was to provide preliminary data that may assist wood products industry manufacturers and environmental health and safety officials in identifying potential hazards of airborne thermally modified wood dust. The study revealed slight differences in airborne particulate matter (PM) by wood species. The unmodified yellow poplar, red maple, and white ash all had relatively similar amounts of PM10 (similar to 29%), while balsam fir (similar to 10%) had the least amount. The unmodified yellow poplar also had the highest amount of PM2.5 and PM1, 14% and 10%, respectively, while the balsam fir had the least amount of PM2.5 and PM1, 2.00% and 1.45%, respectively. Thermally modified yellow poplar had the highest PM10, PM2.5, and PM1. Statistical analysis revealed that none of the five wood species had a significant difference (p<0.05) in particle size distribution between unmodified and thermally modified forms.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available