Date post: | 29-Nov-2014 |
Category: |
Business |
Upload: | forest-products-society |
View: | 337 times |
Download: | 2 times |
MOVING TO ENVIRONMENTALLY FRIENDLY WOOD
PRESERVATIVES AND COATINGS
LAURA REYES, Wood Engineering Department, Engineering Faculty, Universidad del Bìo-Bìo
FABIOLA ANDANA, Civil Engineering Department, Universidad de Concepción
GRECIA AVILES, NATALIA JARA, TAMARA GONZALEZ, Building Engineering School,
Universidad del Bìo-Bìo
Forest Product Society 65th International Convention
Portland, Oregon, june 21st
OUTLINE
-BACKGROUND
-PURPOSE
-MATERIALS &METHOD
-RESULTS & DISCUSSION
-CONCLUSIONS
BACKGROUND
ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT
IMPREGNATION
&
SUPERFICIAL
PROTECTION
WATER SOLVENT
COATING
COPPERAZOLES
BORON SILICATE
CCA
Pinus Radiata
D. DON
WOOD
MATERIALS & METHOD
Impregnation
WOOD
SAMPLES
Corrosion Penetration Retention Lixiviation
Chalking
Adhesion
Checking
Water
absorption
Surface
protection
Coating
selection
Varnish-Stain-Dye
Coating
application
Accelerated
weathering
X ray fluorescence ASOMA
equipment
MATERIALS & METHOD
Pilot scale impregnation plant
MATERIALS & METHOD
Coating selection and characterization
- Varnish
- Stain
- Tint
-Density
-Viscosity
-Solid content
MATERIALS & METHOD
Wood samples
Preserved wood selection Coating application
MATERIALS & METHOD
Accelerated weathering
< Ultraviolet chamber
Rain simulation >
RESULTS
Wood Impregnation Retention
PreservativesRetention
NCh 819Retention
CCA 4,0 4,1
CA-B 1,71,8
BS11,2 11,3
RESULTS
Preservatives Penetration
CCA
( Cromazurol)BS
(curcumin)
CA-B
(Cromazurol)
RESULTS
Corrosion
Preservative
solutionNail type
Weight difference
(% w/w)
CCA
Galvanized iron 1,20
Steel 0,05
Cooper 0
CA-B
Galvanized iron 1,41
Steel 0,07
Cooper 0
BS
Galvanized iron na
Steel na
Cooper na
Lixiviation
RESULTS
Lixiviate Preservative concentration
% (w/w)
Fixing time
(hour)CCA BS CA-B
24 0,00337 0,00897 0,00764
48 0,00149 0,005380,00423
RESULTS
Pot coating characteristics
Properties
CoatingDensity
(g/ml)
Viscosidty
(s)
Solid content
(%p/p)
Varnisn 0,88 190 72,9
Stain 1,02 30 21,6
Dye 0,99 116 11,3
RESULTSCoating performance
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
0 1 2 3 4 5
Po
rce
nta
je d
e P
rob
eta
s
Grados de Adherencia
CONTROL - BARNIZ CONTROL - STAIN CONTROL - TINTEBS - BARNIZ BS - STAIN BS - TINTECA-B - BARNIZ CA-B - STAIN CA-B - TINTECCA - BARNIZ CCA - STAIN CCA - TINTE
Adhesion
RESULTS
Checking
Coating performance
varnish stain dye
RESULTS
TREATMENT COSTS
PreservativeRetention (kg /m3 )
NCh 819
Total cost
($U/m3)
Boronsilicate (BS) 50 kg. 2,14
Copperazole (CA-B) 17,67 kg. 2,27
CCA 6,67 kg. 1
Preservative Costs
RevestimientoYield
(m2/g/applic.)
Total cost
($U/m2/ applic.))
varnish 0,015 1
stain 0,008 1,98
dye 0,010 2,62
Coating application costs
RESULTS
BASE
-Volume; 1 m3 (320 boardS (½” x 4” x 2,4 m.)
•Total surface: 180 m2
Coating Cost ($U /m2/application)
Protection
Product
VARNISH STAIN DYE
Preservative
Cost (U$/m3)
BS 1,43 1,28 1,22
CA-B 1,49 1,3 1,24
CCA 1 1 1
Treatment costs
CONCLUSIONS
- Boron silicates and copperazole lixiviates
concentration are higher than CCA, but has less
environmental impact according to thie
composition
- Stain showed the best performance compared to
varnish and dye over copperazole or BS
treated wood.
CONCLUSIONS
- Preservation treatment costs are higher forCopperazole followed by Boronsilicates andcheaper for CCA.
- Stain application costs less than traditionalvarnish, with lower environmental impact.
- Combined treatment costs are similar for bothCooperazole and BS treated wood coated withstain.
THANK YOU¡¡¡
ANY QUESTIONS?
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
CHEMICAL SUPPLY
ARCHQUIMETAL S.A.
PRESERVA S.A.
UNIVERSIDAD DEL BÌO-BÌO
•ACADEMIC VICE-RECTOR
•RESEARCH DEVELOPMENTE AND INNOVATION DIRECTOR
•ENGINEERING FACULTY DEAN
•WOOD ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT HEAD & TECHNICAL STAFF