Bibliographic Details
| Title: |
Assessment of the Combined Charring and Coating Treatments as a Wood Surface Protection Technique. |
| Authors: |
Žigon, Jure, Pavlič, Matjaž |
| Source: |
Forests (19994907); Mar2023, Vol. 14 Issue 3, p440, 18p |
| Subject Terms: |
ACRYLIC coatings, COMBUSTION, SURFACE preparation, WOOD preservatives, WOOD, CHAR, EUROPEAN larch |
| Abstract: |
Flame treatment is an ancient technique for surface protection of wood. Further processing of charred wood elements depends on aesthetic and protective requirements. This study presents some general properties and weathering behaviour of the Norway spruce (Picea abies (L.) Karst.) and the European larch (Larix decidua Mill.), protected by variations of sanding, charring, charring + brushing, and coating treatments. Charring and charring + brushing reduced the original mass of the samples by up to 8% and notably changed their colour (ΔE* ≤ 75). A study of chemical properties showed that charring dehydrated the wood and degraded lignin and hemicelluloses. The surface roughness of the wood after charring and charring + brushing increased by as much as 560%, while coating with waterborne acrylic high build stain had no effect on the roughness of these surfaces. The type of surface treatment of the wood did not affect the uptake of the coating in the wood samples, but the uncoated and coated spruce wood absorbed more water than larch wood. Higher water absorption was observed in the samples treated by charring, and it decreased when the char layer was removed by brushing. The film of a waterborne high build stain reduced water uptake only for surfaces treated by sanding and charring + brushing. Larch wood exhibited higher surface hardness (EHz ≤ 1.70 MPa) than spruce wood (EHz ≤ 0.89 MPa), with the brittle char layer reducing the determined hardness of the tested surfaces. During two years of natural weathering, the char layer was removed from the wood surface, even if the samples were additionally coated. The greatest colour changes during weathering were observed on samples treated by sanding (ΔE* ≤ 60) and sanding + coating (ΔE* ≤ 33), followed by samples treated with charring + brushing (ΔE* ≤ 10) and samples treated with charring (ΔE* ≤ 9). In summary, treating wood by charring in combination with brushing was the best wood protection technique. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|
Copyright of Forests (19994907) is the property of MDPI and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) |
| Database: |
Complementary Index |
