4.5 Article

Environmentally friendly protection of European beech against fire and fungal decay using a combination of thermal modification and mineralisation

期刊

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/17480272.2023.2223508

关键词

Wood; protection; durability; mechanical properties

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The demand for construction timber is increasing due to its favourable characteristics. However, wood needs adequate protection as it is flammable and susceptible to biodegradation. Thermal modification enhances durability and mineralisation with CaCO3 improves fire properties, so it is worth considering the combined effects of the two methods.
The demand for construction timber is continuously increasing, due to its favourable characteristics. However, the adequate protection of wood is key to its successful use, as it is flammable and susceptible to biodegradation. Given that thermal modification enhances the durability of wood, and mineralisation with CaCO3 considerably improves its fire properties, it is worth considering the combined effects of the two methods.European beech (Fagus sylvatica) was selected to determine the effects of a) thermal modification, b) mineralisation through the in-situ formation of CaCO3, and c) a combination of the two procedures, on resistance to decay fungi, reaction to fire and the mechanical properties of the wood. Microscopic analysis and comparisons of the samples before and after exposure to fungi were also conducted.Mineralised wood generally had a slightly alkaline pH value and higher equilibrium moisture content, while thermal modification lowered the equilibrium moisture content. The present study demonstrated the combined effect of thermal modification and mineralisation: the best response to fire as well as resistance to fungi was achieved when the two treatments were combined. Results from the Brinell hardness and three-point bending tests indicate that both modification procedures can slightly impair the mechanical properties of the wood.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据