Materiales de Construcción

76 (361) January-March 2026, e407

ISSN-L: 0465-2746, eISSN: 1988-3226

https://doi.org/10.3989/mc.2026.391224

ARTICLE

Evaluation of particleboard with Pine wood particles using polyurethane resin and polyethylene terephthalate

Evaluación de tableros de partículas de madera de pino utilizando resina de poliuretano y tereftalato de polietileno

A.G.B. Paula e Silva

Civil Engineering Department, São Paulo State University, (Ilha Solteira, Brazil)

Corresponding author: , https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1045-7675

M.V. de Souza

Civil Engineering Department, São Paulo State University, (Ilha Solteira, Brazil)

, https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1867-3249

F.R. Rodrigues

Physics and Chemistry Department, São Paulo State University, (Ilha Solteira, Brazil)

, https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3895-7169

V.A. De Araujo

Civil Engineering Department, São Paulo State University, (Ilha Solteira, Brazil);
Civil Engineering Department, Federal University of São Carlos, (São Carlos, Brazil)

, https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2747-4738

R.A. Bispo

Physics and Chemistry Department, São Paulo State University, (Ilha Solteira, Brazil)

, https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8320-6490

V.B. de La Libera

Architecture and Urbanism Department, São Paulo State University, (Bauru, Brazil)

, https://orcid.org/0009-0003-4333-5177

L.E. Dezen

Civil Engineering Department, São Paulo State University, (Ilha Solteira, Brazil)

, https://orcid.org/0009-0003-9000-2404

A.L. Christoforo

Civil Engineering Department, Federal University of São Carlos, (São Carlos, Brazil)

, https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4066-080X

S.A.M. da Silva

Civil Engineering Department, São Paulo State University, (Ilha Solteira, Brazil)

, https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6114-0283

ABSTRACT

The use of recycled polyethylene terephthalate (PET) with pine wood shavings was analyzed in the particleboard manufacture using hot-pressing. 160 °C was considered to avoid moisture build-up in the resin structure and polymer degradation and, property losses. 50% Pine with 40% PET and 10% polyurethane resin (PUR) and 50% Pine with 50% PET and 0% PUR were studied traits. Density, thickness swelling, water absorption, modulus of rupture, modulus of elasticity, perpendicular tensile properties and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) were studied. Density was close to 1 g/cm³, classifying both traits as high-density panels according to the standard code. SEM showed that 160 °C provided an effective envelopment of wood shavings. Physical and mechanical panel properties were superior to the minimum values of standard codes in 10% PUR trait, while they were lower with 0% PUR.

Keywords: Particleboard; Pinus; Polyethylene terephthalate; Waste; PUR.

RESUMEN

Se analizó el uso de PET reciclado con virutas de madera de pino en la fabricación de tableros aglomerados prensados con calor. Se consideró 160 °C para evitar la acumulación de humedad en la estructura de la resina y la degradación del polímero y las pérdidas de propiedades. Se estudiaron las características de 50% Pino con 40% PET y 10% PUR y 50% Pino con 50% PET y 0% PUR. Se estudiaron la densidad, el hinchamiento en espesor, la absorción de agua, el módulo de ruptura, el módulo de elasticidad, las propiedades de tracción perpendicular y la MEB. La densidad fue cercana a 1 g/cm³, clasificando los paneles como alta densidad según el código. la MEB mostró que 160 °C proporcionó una envoltura efectiva de las virutas. Las propiedades fueron superiores a los valores mínimos de los códigos en la característica 10% PUR, mientras que fueron inferiores con 0% PUR.

Palabras clave: Tablero aglomerado; Pinus; Tereftalato de polietileno; Residuo; PUR.

Received: 26-07-2024 / Accepted: 18-05-2025 / Published: 29-06-2026

Citation: Paula e Silva AGB, de Souza MV, Rodrigues FR, De Araujo VA, Bispo RA, de La Libera VB, Dezen LE, Christoforo AL, da Silva SAM. 2026. Evaluation of particleboard with Pine wood particles using polyurethane resin and polyethylene terephthalate. Mater. Construcc. 76 (361): e407. https://doi.org/10.3989/mc.2026.391224

Copyright: ©2026 CSIC. This is Diamond Open Access content distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) License.

Supplementary information ↓

Content

1. INTRODUCTION

2. MATERIALS AND METHODS

3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

3.1. Particle density

3.2. Compaction index and density of each panel trait

3.3. Thickness swelling and water absorption of each panel trait after 24 hours

3.4. Mechanical properties of each panel trait

3.5. Pearson correlation

3.6. Scanning electron microscopy

4. CONCLUSIONS

REFERENCES

1. INTRODUCTION ↑

In Brazil, forestry sector moves about 37 billion Dollars (3.5% national gross domestic product) and 10 billion Dollars in exportations (7,3% of exported products), while lumber-plywood and subproducts segment represents almost US$ 3 billion Dollars, demonstrating a certain relevance for this national economy (11. SNIF – Sistema Nacional de Informações Florestais. 2020. Boletim SNIF 2020: dados sobre o setor florestal brasileiro. Brasília: Ministério da Agricultura, Pecuária e Abastecimento, Serviço Florestal Brasileiro.). According to the Brazilian Associations of Furniture Industry and for Mechanically Processed Timber, the most dependent wood sectors are furniture and construction, which consumed 8.8 million and 8.3 million of cubic meters of logs in 2020, respectively (22. ABIMCI – Associação Brasileira da Indústria de Madeira Processada Mecanicamente. 2020. Dados estatísticos do setor de madeira processada mecanicamente. Curitiba: ABIMCI., 33. ABIMOVEL – Associação Brasileira da Indústria de Móveis. 2020. Relatório anual de consumo de madeira no setor moveleiro. Brasília: ABIMOVEL.).

The rational use of natural resources in timber forest products is crucial for bioeconomy, as it involves a fundamental principle of the sustainable development goals (44. Pedzik M, Janiszewska D, Rogozinski T. 2021. Alternative lignocellulosic raw materials in particleboard production: A review. Ind. Crops Prod. 174:114162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indcrop.2021.114162, 55. De Araujo V, Vasconcelos J, Lahr F, Christoforo A. 2022. Timber forest products: A way to intensify global bioeconomy from bio-materials. Acta Fac. Xylologiae Zvolen. 64(1):99-111. https://doi.org/10.17423/afx.2022.64.1.09). Promoting the initiatives and maximizing the uses of responsible forest management are important, as they are good ways to utilize bioresources in the manufacture of particleboard panels with a noble purpose of wood featured by lower dimensions and qualities (66. Guimarães Júnior JB. 2008. Painéis de madeira de eucalipto: estudo de caso de espécies e procedências. M.Sc. Dissertation. Universidade Federal de Lavras, Lavras.). Reconstituted wood panels are produced from different stages of wood disintegration, in which synthetic adhesives are incorporated under the action of pressure and temperature in order to form panels for multiple applications, including furniture, flooring manufacturing and construction sectors (77. Araujo CKC, de Campos CI, Camargo SKCA, Camargo BS. 2019. Caracterização mecânica de painéis particulados de média densidade produzidos a partir de resíduos de madeira. Revista Gestão Industrial 15(1):197-211. https://doi.org/10.3895/gi.v15n1.9159-1010. Bertolini MS. 2011. Emprego de resíduos de Pinus sp tratado com preservantes CCB na produção de chapas de partículas homogêneas utilizando resina poliuretano à base de mamona. M.Sc. dissertation. Universidade de São Paulo, São Carlos.).

Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) is a synthetic thermoplastic polymer widely used in the textile, packaging, and fiber sectors due to interesting mechanical and physical features. Discovered in the United States during 1950s, PET became a relevant material for the market, especially for the beverage sector for bottling carbonated liquids due to its efficient gas barrier (1111. ABIPET – Associação Brasileira da Indústria do PET. 2018. Panorama da indústria do PET no Brasil. São Paulo: ABIPET.). In Brazil, 359 thousand tons of PET were duly recycled by the national industry, which represented a growth of 15.4% over the volume recorded in 2019 (1212. ABIPET – Associação Brasileira da Indústria do PET. 2022. Censo da reciclagem do PET no Brasil: relatório de 2022. São Paulo: ABIPET).

Adhesives are polymers defined as organic or inorganic agents used to bind wood particles or lignocellulosic materials in the production of particle boards (1313. ABNT – Associação Brasileira de Normas Técnicas. 2013. NBR 14810-3: Adesivos para madeira - Determinação do teor de sólidos e viscosidade do adesivo poliuretânico. Rio de Janeiro: ABNT.-1616. ASTM – American Society for Testing and Materials. 2016. ASTM D905-08: Standard test method for strength properties of adhesive bonds in shear by compression loading. West Conshohocken: ASTM International.). Resin composes the main component that influences the production cost of particleboards (1717. Iwakiri S. 2005. Painéis de madeira reconstituída. Curitiba: Fundação de Pesquisas Florestais do Paraná.-1818. Trianoski R. 2020. Adesivos para painéis de madeira: desenvolvimento e aplicações. Curitiba: Editora Técnica Florestal.), which is why its use must be optimized to minimize the final cost of glued products and meet the required properties. Maloney (19) 19. Maloney TM. 1993. Modern Particleboard & dry-process fiberboard manufacturing. San Francisco: Miller Freeman Publications. confirmed that the physical and mechanical properties of particleboards improve proportionally with the increase in the amount of adhesive, especially the perpendicular tensile strength. However, this practice significantly increases production costs, making it few feasible.

Widely used in several scientific areas, polyurethanes include applications in foams, elastomers, fibers, coatings and adhesives (2020. Coutinho FMB, Delpech MC. 1999. Poliuretanos como materiais de revestimento de superfície. Polímeros 9:41-48.). Produced by polymerization of hydroxyls with isocyanates, these materials have urethane groups (2121. Mölleken RE. 2017. Aplicação do adesivo poliuretano derivado do óleo de mamona na obtenção de painéis de madeira colados lateralmente. 2017. M.Sc. Dissertation. Universidade Tecnológica Federal do Paraná, Curitiba.). Polyurethane adhesives can be single-component or two-component (2222. Jesus JMH. 2000. Estudo do adesivo poliuretano à base de mamona em madeira laminada colada (MLC). D.Sc. Thesis. Universidade de São Paulo, São Carlos.). Ricinus communis L., or castor oil plant, produces castor oil, used in several industrial processes (2323. Anjos e Silva SD, Andres A, Ueno B, Flores CA, Gomes CB, Pillon CN, Anthonisen D, Machado EB, Theisen G, Magnani M, Wrege MS, Aires RF. 2005. A cultura da Mamona na região de clima temperado: informações preliminares. 1st.ed. Pelotas: Embrapa Clima Temperado. pp.6-23.). Thus, polyurethane adhesives derived from castor oil are biodegradable and non-polluting (2424. Araújo LCR. 1992. Caracterização química e mecânica de poliuretanas elastoméricas baseadas em materiais oleoquímicos. M.Sc. dissertation. Universidade de São Paulo, São Carlos., 2525. Wechsler A, Zaharia M, Crosky A, Jones H, Ramírez M, Ballerini A, Nuñez M, Sahajwalla V. 2013. Macadamia (Macadamia integrifolia) shell and castor (Rícinos communis) oil based sustainable particleboard: a comparison of its properties with conventional wood-based particleboard. Mater. Des. 50:117-123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2013.03.008).

Recent studies have addressed innovation in the use of sustainable materials for construction from alternative gluing agents. Maderuelo-Sanz et al. (26)26. Maderuelo-Sanz R, García-Cobos FJ, Sánchez-Delgado FJ, Meneses-Rodríguez JM, Mota-López MI 2022. Mechanical and acoustical evaluation of bio-based composites made of cork granulates for acoustic ceiling tiles. Mater. Construcc. 72(347):e295. https://doi.org/10.3989/mc.2022.15221 analyzed the development of acoustic panels based on cork and water-based resins to be applied for acoustic ceiling, and their results showed good sound absorption and acceptable flexural strength. In addition, Suoware et al. (27)27. Suoware TO, Edelugo SO, Ugwu BN, Amula E, Digitemie IE 2019. Development of flame retarded composite fibreboard for building applications using oil palm residue. Mater. Construcc. 69(335):e197. https://doi.org/10.3989/mc.2019.10418 studied the development of flame retarded composite fiberboard using residual palm oil with polyester resin, where 18% retardant formulation meets fire safety standard codes for indoor application. In other way, the use of recycled plastics emerges as another alternative to reduce generated waste.

Wood-plastic composites (WPC) are formed by two elements, that is, matrix and reinforcement. In the first type, matrix is predominantly made of thermoplastic material, while wood element acts as a filler or a reinforcement with a content typically less than 60% by mass (2828. Ezzahrae MF, Nacer A, Latifab E, Abdellah Z, Mohamed I, Jammoukh M. 2023. Thermal and mechanical properties of a High-density Polyethylene (HDPE) composite reinforced with wood flour. Mater. Today Proc. 72(7):3602-3608. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2022.08.394, 2929. Stark NM, Cai Z. 2021. Wood-based composite materials: panel products, glued laminated timber, structural composite lumber, and wood-non wood composites. In: Wood handbook – wood as an engineering material. General Technical Report FPL-GTR-282. Madison: Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Forest Products Laboratory. p.543.).

For other type, composites have a low thermoplastic content, where thermoplastic acts more as a fiber binder with a content less than 30% by mass. WPC are manufactured by extrusion, injection, and high-temperature compression. Unlike particleboards, these composites do not use adhesives, although agents can be used to improve the adhesion (2828. Ezzahrae MF, Nacer A, Latifab E, Abdellah Z, Mohamed I, Jammoukh M. 2023. Thermal and mechanical properties of a High-density Polyethylene (HDPE) composite reinforced with wood flour. Mater. Today Proc. 72(7):3602-3608. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2022.08.394, 2929. Stark NM, Cai Z. 2021. Wood-based composite materials: panel products, glued laminated timber, structural composite lumber, and wood-non wood composites. In: Wood handbook – wood as an engineering material. General Technical Report FPL-GTR-282. Madison: Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Forest Products Laboratory. p.543.).

The reuse of thermoplastics in the production of composites through flat pressing with heat or extrusion, using lignocellulosic residues from the agroindustry or sawdust from wood processing, has been the subject of global research. Researchers have explored many combinations to improve the properties of composites and promote the sustainability of the industry, such as the use of recycled thermoplastics combined with corncob (3030. Junxiong H, Zhinan W, Liping L, Chuigen G. 2023. Value-added utilization of corncob hydrolysis residues: preparation of reinforced wood-plastic composite with highly water resistance and decay resistance. Ind. Crops Prod. 195:116497. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indcrop.2023.116497), coconut fiber (3131. Dharmaratne PD, Galabada H, Nilmini R, Jayasinghe R, Halwatura RU. 2021. Preliminary investigation of the suitability of coir fiber and thermoplastic waste as a construction material. Engineer. 54(4):65-74. https://doi.org/10.4038/engineer.v54i4.7471), and sawdust without the use of adhesives (3232. Chotikhun A, Kittijaruwattanna J, Arsyad WM, Salca E, Hadi Y, Hiziroglu S. 2022. Some properties of wood plastic composites made from rubberwood, recycled plastic and silica. Forests. 13(3):427. https://doi.org/10.3390/f13030427-3535. Lopez YM, Paes J, Rodríguez E, Gustave D, Gonçalves FG. 2018. Wood particleboards reinforced with thermoplastics to improve th ickness swelling and mechanical properties. Cerne 24(4):369-378. https://doi.org/10.1590/01047760201824042582).

Rahman et al. (36)36. Rahman KS, Islam M, Rahman MM, Hannan MO, Dungani R, Khalil H. 2013.Flat-pressed wood plastic composites from sawdust and recycled polyethylene terephthalate (PET): physical and mechanical properties. SpringerPlus. 2:629. https://doi.org/10.1186/2193-1801-2-629 evaluated wood-plastic composites (WPC) using sawdust and recycled polyethylene terephthalate (PET) in proportions of 40/60, 50/50, 60/40 and 70/30, without the addition of binder adhesives. The methodology involved flat compression with heating at 190 ºC, 5 MPa pressure for 25 minutes, parameters which are similar to the particleboard production. Physical-mechanical properties such as density, water absorption, thickness swelling, modulus of elasticity (MOE) and modulus of rupture (MOR) in static bending were analyzed. Results indicated that increasing the PET proportion resulted in a 15.7% reduction in water absorption in 24h and 4.3% in thickness swelling, comparing the 70/30 and 40/60 proportions. Furthermore, MOE and MOR increased significantly with the reduction of sawdust and the increase of PET, ranging from 1433.93 MPa (70/30) to 2008.34 MPa (40/60) and from 11.68 MPa (70/30) to 27.08 MPa (40/60), respectively.

In a subsequent study, Rahman et al. (37)37. Rahman KS, Islam MN, Ratul SB, Hasan ND, Musa S, Hannan MO. 2018. Properties of flat-pressed wood plastic composites as a function of particle size and mixing ratio. J. Wood Science. 64:279-286. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10086-018-1702-3 investigated WPC with different proportions of wood and PET particles, such as 40/60, 50/50, 60/40, and 70/30, as well as different wood dimensions (from 0.5 to 1.0 mm and 1.1 to 2.0 mm) combined with PET particles smaller than 0.25 mm. The methodology involved flat compression at 190 °C for 5 min, followed by pressing without heat for 6 min, both processes at 5 MPa. Results showed that increasing the proportions of PET increased the composite density. Wood particles between 0.5 and 1.0 mm had higher density than those of 1.1 to 2.0 mm. Panels with particles of 0.5 to 1.0 mm and a 40/60 ratio presented the lowest absorption and swelling values in 24h. The highest MOR and MOE values were observed in panels with particles of 1.1 to 2.0 mm, with the 40/60 mixture having the highest MOR (above 30 MPa) and the 50/50 mixture having the highest MOE (2570 MPa). As conclusion, the size of wood particles directly influenced the composite properties and 50/50 ratio between wood and PET is the most promising and technically viable.

Campos et al. (38)38. Campos PHS, Junior AJS, Souza, MV, Herradon MP, Libera VBL, Dezen LE, da Silva ÉV, e Silva AGBP, Rodrigues FR, Bispo RA, Cazella PHS, da Silva SAM, Christoforo AL 2023. Evaluation and production of high-strength wood composite panels with polyethylene terephthalate (PET). BioResources. 18(4):8528-8535. https://doi.org/10.15376/biores.18.4.8528-8535 evaluated particle boards made from Pinus elliotti mixed with PET flakes and 10% castor oil-based polyurethane resin (PUR). Temperature during panel production varied (160 °C and 180 °C) to assess its influence on the physical and mechanical properties. The results showed that increasing the temperature did not significantly improve the properties of the panels, but the results showed potential for application according to standards.

Cazella et al. (39)39. Cazella PHS, Souza MV, Rodrigues FR, Silva SAM, Bispo RA, Araujo V, Christoforo AL. 2024. Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) as a recycled raw material for particleboards produced from Pinus wood and biopolymer resin. J. Clean. Prod. 447:141460. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2024.141460 evaluated the influence of recycled PET particles on five prototypes of particle boards based on Pinus elliotti wood and castor oil-derived polyurethane resin (CPUR). The mixtures varied between 100% wood and 0% PET, 70% wood and 30% PET, and 50% of each material, with different proportions of CPUR (5% and 10%). Panels were evaluated in terms of physical, mechanical and morphological properties, showing a promising outcome. Particleboards with 50% pine and 50% PET with 10% CPUR showed the best performance in the physical and mechanical tests, with results equivalent to the 70% pine and 30% PET with 10% CPUR and 50% pine and 50% PET with 5% CPUR. Results suggest a significant environmental contribution and economic viability in the production of WPC with recycled PET, reusing this non-biodegradable plastic and using a smaller volume of adhesive.

In view of this scenario, current research focuses on the development of biodegradable, non-toxic, non-polluting materials from renewable sources, such as polyurethane derived from castor oil and polyurethane from starch (4040. Azevedo EC 2009. Efeito da radiação nas propriedades mecânicas do adesivo de poliuretano derivado de óleo de mamona. D.Sc. Thesis. Universidade Federal do Paraná, Curitiba, 2009., 4141. Fiorelli J, Bueno SB, Cabral MR. 2019. Assessment of multilayer particleboards produced with green coconut and sugarcane bagasse fibers. Constr. Build. Mater. 205:1-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.02.024). Regardless of the origin of the adhesive, its main function is to join parts of a set, evenly distributing tensions so that the final product does not require mechanical fasteners (4242. Celestino VRB 2020. Estudo do comportamento físico e mecânico de painéis aglomerados fabricados com partículas de Tectona grandis e Corymbia citriodora. D.Sc. thesis. Universidade Estadual Paulista, Bauru.).

Aiming at the search for alternative and sustainable materials, the polyurethane adhesive obtained from castor oil (CPUR) has been a promising alternative to replace the urea formaldehyde (UF) resin in particleboard panels. This is due to the fact that, unlike formaldehyde-based adhesives, the gases produced by polyurethane are less harmful to human health.

In this study, two traits were evaluated with three panels for each one, in which they were pressed at 5 MPa and 160 °C. Therefore, this work evaluated the production of particleboard panels with pine wood particles and recycled PET as an additive in order to improve the panel waterproofing, including a trait bonded with polyurethane resin (PUR) and another without this bonding agent.

2. MATERIALS AND METHODS ↑

Particleboards were developed based on the guidelines of two Brazilian standard codes: NBR 14810-1 (1414. ABNT – Associação Brasileira de Normas Técnicas. 2013. NBR 14810-1: Chapas de madeira aglomerada - Parte 1: Terminologia. Rio de Janeiro, 2013.), which defines the terminology and components of these panels, and NBR 14810-2 (1515. ABNT – Associação Brasileira de Normas Técnicas. 2018. NBR 14810-2: Chapas de madeira aglomerada - Parte 2: Requisitos. Rio de Janeiro, 2018.), which details the tests and procedures for evaluating any particleboard.

Particles of Pinus ssp wood species were used in the production of the panels, which were supplied by KELAN Indústria e Comércio de Móveis Ltda., a company located in Penápolis, Brazil. This industry has generated a significant volume of wood waste in the furniture production, especially from the turning of 250 x 40 x 40 mm beams, originating from reforested pine wood supplied by plantations of Fazenda Rio Grande city, which are specialized in supplying wood to a series of furniture producers in Brazil.

PET used in this study was supplied by Global PET SA, a company located in São Carlos, Brazil. Small particles, with a grain size of 2 mm, selected and processed by this industry were originated from discarded beverage bottles.

Both plastic and wood particles to be evaluated in both traits were oven-dried at 103 °C ± 2 °C as described by Borysiuk et al. (43)43. Borysiuk M, Piasecki J, Polak M. 2020. Effect of wood particles drying on the properties of wood composites. Compos. B Eng. 182:107586. and Klímek et al. (44)44. Klímek P, Morávek T, Ráhel J, Stupavská M, Decky D, Král PI, Kúdela J, Wimmer R. 2016. Utilization of air-plasma treated waste polyethylene terephthalate particles as a raw material for particleboard production. Compos. B Eng. 90:188-194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2015.12.019 in order to reach a constant moisture from 3% to 5%. Sequentially, the particle size composition was determined through a test adapted from Brazilian NBR NM 248 (4545. ABNT – Associação Brasileira de Normas Técnicas. 2003. NBR NM 248: Determinação da composição granulométrica de materiais particulados. Rio de Janeiro, 2003.) standard code, as considered in previous studies of Trevisan (46)46. Trevisan CG. 2021. Painéis aglomerados homogêneos produzidos com partículas de pinus e seringueira e aglutinados com adesivo poliuretano derivado de óleo de mamona – avaliação das propriedades físicas e mecânicas. M.Sc. dissertation, Universidade Estadual Paulista, Ilha Solteira. and Bispo (47)47. Bispo RA (2021). Produção e avaliação de painéis de partículas de fibra de coco, pínus e eucalipto aglutinadas com adesivo poliuretano derivado de óleo de mamona. M.Sc. dissertation, Universidade Estadual Paulista, Ilha Solteira. – following these authors, 35 g particle mass was considered.

The Brazilian NBR 6458 (4848. ABNT – Associação Brasileira de Normas Técnicas. 2017. NBR 6458: Grãos de pedregulho retidos na peneira de abertura 4,8 mm - Determinação da massa específica, da massa específica aparente e da absorção de água. Rio de Janeiro, ABNT.) and NBR 6457 (4949. ABNT – Associação Brasileira de Normas Técnicas. 2016. NBR 6457: Preparação de amostras para ensaios de compactação, caracterização e determinação do teor de umidade. Rio de Janeiro, ABNT.) standard codes were used to determine the particle density. The test consists of using a volumetric flask, a #2 pycnometer calibrated for 500 ml anhydrous ethyl alcohol (99.3% INPM), and a 0.1 °C graduated thermometer with a range of -10 °C to 100 °C.

After particle processing, granulometric selection was carried out to obtain particles in the range of 2 mm to 6 mm and then the test determined the granulometric composition (5050. Silva RM. 2018. Granulometria e suas influências na produção de painéis aglomerados. Jornal de Materiais e Engenharia 9(1):30-38.). All panels were produced with an 0.55 g/cm³ initial density and 350 x 350 x 12 mm dimension. Particle homogenization followed the methodology successfully used by Buzo et al. (51)51. Buzo ALSC, Sugahara ES, Silva SAM, Morales EAM, Azambuja MA. 2019.Painéis de Pinus e bagaço de cana empregando-se dois adesivos para uso na construção civil. Ambiente Construído. 19:183-193. https://doi.org/10.1590/s1678-86212019000400350 and Sugahara et al. (52)52. Sugahara ES, Silva SAM, Buzo ALSC, Campos C, Morales E, Ferreira BS, Azambuja MDA, Lahr F, Christoforo AL. 2019. High-density particleboard made from agro-industrial waste and differente adhesives. Bioresources. 14(3):5162-5170. https://doi.org/10.15376/biores.14.3.5162-5170. Particles were initially mixed manually and then mixed for five minutes in a rotating drum.

After homogenization, each particle mattress was prepared and pressed in a hydraulic press (Figure 1). Equal pressing parameters were strictly considered for both traits, that is, 5 MPa pressure for a total time of 10 minutes at 160 °C, with a 30-second interval for degassing process.

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

Figure 1. Preparation and pressing stage of particleboards: (a) particle accommodation, (b) heat-press, (c) mattress conditioned in heat-pressing, and (d) particleboard after pressing.

Regarding the panel characterization, the static bending test in the modulus of rupture (MOR) was performed to obtain the parameters for this test and for the modulus of elasticity (MOE). For MOR test, panels were dimensioned in 50 mm x 50 mm x 12 mm. In sequence, perpendicular tensile (PT), density (D), 24-hour thickness swelling (TS24H), 24h water absorption (WA24H) and moisture content (MC) tests were performed using 10 panel specimens per test according to the considerations prescribed in NBR 14810-2 (1515. ABNT – Associação Brasileira de Normas Técnicas. 2018. NBR 14810-2: Chapas de madeira aglomerada - Parte 2: Requisitos. Rio de Janeiro, 2018.) standard code for particleboards.

All results of the panel characterization tests were analyzed using the Tukey mean contrast test, at a 5% significance level, in order to evaluate the influence of the panel trait on each physical and mechanical property under observation. From Tukey mean contrast test, “A” letter will denote the treatment associated with the highest mean property value, “B” will denote the second highest value and so on. Identical letters will imply distinct treatments with statistically equivalent means. From the Anderson-Darling (AD) normality test, a p-value higher than the significance level (5%) implies normality in the distribution of the ANOVA residuals, validating the results of Tukey test.

Two standard codes were considered in the characterization and evaluation of particleboards, given by the Brazilian NBR 14810-2 (1515. ABNT – Associação Brasileira de Normas Técnicas. 2018. NBR 14810-2: Chapas de madeira aglomerada - Parte 2: Requisitos. Rio de Janeiro, 2018.) and the North American A208.1 (5353. ANSI – American National Standards Institute. 2016. ANSI A208.1: Particleboard. Washington, ANSI.), in which average parameters are prescribed according to each document and identified in Table 1. This standard information was used to compare and validate the obtained results.

Table 1. Standardized parameters and properties considered according to both standard codes.

Standard code
(Source)

Panel category

Thickness (mm)

TS24H (%)

MOR
(MPa)

MOE
(MPa)

PT
(MPa)

NBR 14810-2 (1515. ABNT – Associação Brasileira de Normas Técnicas. 2018. NBR 14810-2: Chapas de madeira aglomerada - Parte 2: Requisitos. Rio de Janeiro, 2018.)

P2

> 6 to 13

22

11

1800

0.40

NBR 14810-2 (1515. ABNT – Associação Brasileira de Normas Técnicas. 2018. NBR 14810-2: Chapas de madeira aglomerada - Parte 2: Requisitos. Rio de Janeiro, 2018.)

P3

> 6 to 13

17

15

2050

0.45

A 208.1 (5353. ANSI – American National Standards Institute. 2016. ANSI A208.1: Particleboard. Washington, ANSI.)

H-1

Not applicable

Not applicable

14.9

2160

0.81

A 208.1 (5353. ANSI – American National Standards Institute. 2016. ANSI A208.1: Particleboard. Washington, ANSI.)

H-2

Not applicable

Not applicable

18.5

2160

0.81

A 208.1 (5353. ANSI – American National Standards Institute. 2016. ANSI A208.1: Particleboard. Washington, ANSI.)

H-3

Not applicable

Not applicable

21.1

2475

0.90

A 208.1 (5353. ANSI – American National Standards Institute. 2016. ANSI A208.1: Particleboard. Washington, ANSI.)

M-0

Not applicable

Not applicable

7.6

1380

0.31

A 208.1 (5353. ANSI – American National Standards Institute. 2016. ANSI A208.1: Particleboard. Washington, ANSI.)

M-1

Not applicable

Not applicable

10

1550

0.36

A 208.1 (5353. ANSI – American National Standards Institute. 2016. ANSI A208.1: Particleboard. Washington, ANSI.)

M-S

Not applicable

Not applicable

11

1700

0.36

A 208.1 (5353. ANSI – American National Standards Institute. 2016. ANSI A208.1: Particleboard. Washington, ANSI.)

M-2

Not applicable

Not applicable

13

2000

0.40

TS24H: thickness swelling after 24 hours; MOR: modulus of rupture; MOE: modulus of elasticity; PT: perpendicular tensile.

For scanning electron microscopy (SEM), fractured samples after testing (perpendicular tensile) were extracted to be evaluated, being resized to obtain test specimens with 1.0 mm x 1.0 mm x 0.4 mm. Using a Quarum equipment, model Q150TE, all specimens were fixed with double-sided carbon tape using “stub door” and then metallized with a thin layer of gold. Subsequently, these prepared specimens were analyzed on the ZEISS equipment, model EVO LS15, equipped with an Oxford system EDS type, model INCAx-act. SEM was carried out and images were analyzed in the Department of Physics and Chemistry of the São Paulo State University. This stage utilized similar protocols, resources and paths – as follows the way considered by Cazella et al. (39)39. Cazella PHS, Souza MV, Rodrigues FR, Silva SAM, Bispo RA, Araujo V, Christoforo AL. 2024. Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) as a recycled raw material for particleboards produced from Pinus wood and biopolymer resin. J. Clean. Prod. 447:141460. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2024.141460.

3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ↑

3.1. Particle density ↑

Considering the standardized parameters for the panel manufacture and evaluation, the densities (D) of plastic and wood particles were measured insofar as density is an important parameter for evaluating the compaction index of the particleboards. According to Table 2, it was verified that PET particles were more than twice as dense as softwood.

Table 2. Mean results of density of material particles.

Particle type

DPARTICLE (g/cm3)

Pine wood

0.605

Polyethylene terephthalate (PET)

1.360

D: density.

3.2. Compaction index and density of each panel trait ↑

For panel production, it is necessary to identify the compaction index. It is an important parameter for manufacturing particleboards and, consequently, defining physical and mechanical properties.

The compaction index was determined by the ratio between the average density of the panels and the specific mass of the particles. Based on wood particle density in Table 2 and medium density for all panel traits under consideration in this research, compaction indexes were determined for each mixture. Additionally, moisture content of each panel trait was verified (Table 3).

Table 3. Mean results of density and compaction index.

Panel trait

DPARTICLE BOARD (g/cm³)

DWOOD PARTICLE (g/cm³)

MCPARTICLE BOARD (%)

CI

50% Pine 40% PET 10% PUR

1.118

0.605

3.71

1.847

50% Pine 50% PET 0% PUR

0.948

0.605

4.62

1.566

D: density; CI: compaction index; PET: polyethylene terephthalate; PUR: polyurethane resin.

For the 50% Pine with 40% PET and 10% PUR, the compaction index was 1.847. However, it is worth noting that PUR and PET densities are greater than 1 g/cm3 and, therefore, they influenced this calculated index. For 50% Pine with 40% PET and 10% PUR, the compaction index was 1.566, as seen in Table 3 – this trait is in accordance with Araujo et al. (7)7. Araujo CKC, de Campos CI, Camargo SKCA, Camargo BS. 2019. Caracterização mecânica de painéis particulados de média densidade produzidos a partir de resíduos de madeira. Revista Gestão Industrial 15(1):197-211. https://doi.org/10.3895/gi.v15n1.9159 and Trianoski (54)54. Trianoski R. 2010. Avaliação do potencial de espécies florestais alternativas, de rápido crescimento, para produção de painéis de madeira aglomerada. D.Sc. dissertation. Universidade Federal do Paraná, Curitiba., which obtained a range of 1.3 to 1.6 for urea-formaldehyde-based panels.

In the research developed by Dotun et al. (55)55. Dotun AO, Adesoji AA, Oluwatimilehin AC. 2018. Physical and mechanical properties evaluation of particle board produced from saw dust and plastic waste. Int. J. Eng. Res. Afr. 40:1-8. https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/JERA.40.1 replacing wood particles with PET, panels demonstrated greater densification and compaction compared to panels without the PET addition. In particleboards bonded with 20% urea-formaldehyde resin, the trait with 70% sawdust and 30% PET reached a 0.537 g/cm3 density, while for panels with 50% sawdust and 50% PET obtained a 0.71 g/cm3 density. In this replacement, this study confirmed that the increase in PET proportion significantly improved compaction and increased the density of tested panels.

3.3. Thickness swelling and water absorption of each panel trait after 24 hours ↑

Results of thickness swelling (TS24H) and water absorption (WA24H) after 24 hours are indicated in Table 4. Pine-PET particleboards produced with PUR were more efficient from the point of view of waterproofing properties in relation to trait without PUR. Therefore, the absence of resin provided greater moisture contents for TS24H and WA24H compared to glued panels.

In the production of particleboards made from residues of candeia and eucalypt woods developed by Santos et al. (56)56. Santos JA, Oliveira MA, Lima PA. 2011. Influência de resíduo de madeira na produção de painéis aglomerados. Revista Brasileira de Engenharia de Materiais 13(3):200-210. bonded with 12% urea-formaldehyde resin, the influence of different PET percentages in the presence and absence of paraffin was evidenced. In the absorption results after 24 hours in the 50% PET trait, a significant reduction of 16% water was observed (Table 4), when compared to the mixture with 0% PET. Therefore, it was possible to infer that water absorption in the panels tends to decrease with the increase in the replacement of wood by PET.

In the Cazella et al. (39)39. Cazella PHS, Souza MV, Rodrigues FR, Silva SAM, Bispo RA, Araujo V, Christoforo AL. 2024. Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) as a recycled raw material for particleboards produced from Pinus wood and biopolymer resin. J. Clean. Prod. 447:141460. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2024.141460 study, particleboards with 50% PET and 10% PUR showed swelling less than 4%, evidencing good influences of PET and PUR on the panel traits. This provides good agglutination and occupation of empty spaces inside the panels, as well as an efficient enveloping of the particles due to good waterproofing against internal water percolation.

In a study with homogeneous panels using Hevea brasiliensis and Tectona grandis woods, Gilio (57)57. Gilio CG. 2020. Avaliação de painéis de maravalhas homogêneas empregando-se madeira de Hevea brasiliensis e Tectona grandis, aglutinadas com adesivo poliuretano derivado de óleo de mamona. M.Sc. dissertation. Universidade Estadual Paulista, Ilha Solteira. also showed that the PUR presents waterproof characteristics when its content is increased from 5 to 10% in the production of the panels.

Table 4. Mean and statistical results of 24-hour thickness swelling and water absorption.

Panel trait

TS24H (%) [%]

WA24H (%) [%]

50% Pine 40% PET 10% PUR

10.69 B [23.45]

6.47 B [27.57]

50% Pine 50% PET 0% PUR

88.16 A [28.42]

48.41 A [30.23]

p-value

0.123

0.245

TS24H: thickness swelling (24h); WA24H: water absorption (24h); PET: polyethylene terephthalate; PUR: polyurethane resin. “A” denotes the treatment associated with the highest mean value, “B” will denote the second highest value and so on, and identical letters imply distinct treatments with statistically equivalent means.

Thus, results obtained from the TS24H and WA24H tests, as shown in Table 4, allowed to infer that both PUR and PET materials can provide good waterproofing to the panels. Considering the results obtained in the tests to determine the WA24H and TS24H, a statistical analysis was performed to evaluate both properties from the point of view of the Tukey mean contrast test.

Based on the statistical evaluation for TS24H and WA24H, it is possible to conclude that there was a statistically significant difference, since the panels of PUR trait provided better waterproofing to the panels compared to the panels without PUR.

3.4. Mechanical properties of each panel trait ↑

Results related to the perpendicular tensile test (PT), the static bending in the modulus of rupture (MOR) and the modulus of elasticity (MOE) are identified in Table 5.

Similar to physical properties, mechanical properties demonstrated a better quality of panel trait with PUR. This condition was expected due to the absence of gluing agent for bonding PET and pine particles. Considering MOR, MOE and PT results, a statistical analysis evaluated mechanical properties from the point of view of the Tukey mean contrast test (Table 5).

Table 5. Mean and statistical results of mechanical properties.

Panel trait

MOR (MPa) [%]

MOE (MPa) [%]

PT (MPa) [%]

50% Pine 40% PET 10% PUR

32.64 A [12.72]

2277.77 A [26.42]

1.69 B [15.09]

50% Pine 50% PET 0% PUR

5.43 C [31.72]

530 B [31.59]

0.19 D [38.63]

p-value

0.629

0.837

0.876

MOR: modulus of rupture; MOE: modulus of elasticity; PT: perpendicular tensile; PET: polyethylene terephthalate; PUR: polyurethane resin. “A” denotes the treatment associated with the highest mean value, “B” will denote the second highest value and so on, and identical letters imply distinct treatments with statistically equivalent means.

As revealed by Cazella et al. (39)39. Cazella PHS, Souza MV, Rodrigues FR, Silva SAM, Bispo RA, Araujo V, Christoforo AL. 2024. Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) as a recycled raw material for particleboards produced from Pinus wood and biopolymer resin. J. Clean. Prod. 447:141460. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2024.141460, 50% pine with 50% PET and 10% PUR particleboard trait showed an increase about 113% in MOR compared to panels without PET. This allowed to infer that the increase in panel resistance may be related to the inclusion of PET in replacement of the pine wood particles associated with PUR, which improves the panel waterproofing.

Based on the statistical analysis presented for each property described in Table 5, p-values of the Anderson Darling normality test were higher than the 5% significance level, which validated the results obtained from the Tukey mean contrast test. Regarding panels without PUR, their results were significantly lower compared to the values obtained for particleboards with PUR. This fact indicates that the association of PET with PUR was efficient in the panel manufacturing to the point of improving physical and mechanical properties.

Comparing our results with average values described in Table 1, glued-panel traits (with PUR) can be classified according to the Brazilian standard code NBR 14810-2 (15) as “P2”and “P3” and the North American standard code A208.1 (5353. ANSI – American National Standards Institute. 2016. ANSI A208.1: Particleboard. Washington, ANSI.) as “H-1”, “H-2”, “H-3”, “M-0”, “M-1”, “M-S” and “M-2” panel categories.

3.5. Pearson correlation ↑

Results of Pearson correlation test (- 1 ≤ r ≤ 1) are described in Table 6 for physical and mechanical properties of particleboards produced according to two treatments.

Table 6. Results of the correlation analyses between the physical and mechanical properties considering the two experimental treatments.

Property

Statistics

ρ

MC

WA24H

TS24H

MOR

MOE

MC

r

-0.284

p-value

0.224

WA24H

r

-0.574

0.492

p-value

0.008

0.028

TS24H

r

-0.494

0.432

0.970

p-value

0.027

0.036

0.000

MOR

r

0.572

-0.444

-0.942

-0.936

p-value

0.008

0.023

0.000

0.000

MOE

r

0.537

-0.309

-0.843

-0.834

0.927

p-value

0.015

0.185

0.000

0.000

0.000

PT

r

0.535

-0.485

-0.941

-0.918

0.962

0.897

p-value

0.015

0.030

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

*In the ANOVA at 5% significance, p-value lower than 0.05 indicates significance and, therefore, the same is not significante otherwise.

Among all the correlations, only one was not considered significant by ANOVA, which relates density (ρ) to moisture content (MC). Due to this correlation, the increase in panel density did not promote significant reductions in moisture content values. For density, negative correlations were verified in this property with water absorption (WA24H) and thickness swelling (TS24H). This implies that increases in density can impact reductions in these two properties based on water influences. Positive correlations were obtained among density with modulus of rupture (MOR), modulus of elasticity (MOE) and perpendicular tensile (PT) – that is, increases in density impacted increases in these three mechanical properties, as results evinced by Table 6.

For moisture content, positive correlaitons were confirmed among the same and water absorption and thickness swelling – that is, increases in moisture also increase the values of these water-influenced properties.

With respect to modulus of rupture, modulus of elasticity and perpendicular tensile, both correlations are negative – that is, increases in moisture resulted in increases in these three mechanical properties. This condition was also confirmed by (5858. Souza MV, Silva SAM, Cazella PHS, Rodrigues FR, Bonfim KS, Sanches AO, Araujo VA, Santos HF, Pinto EM, Christoforo AL, Aouada MRM, Aouada FA, Lahr FA. Particleboards manufactured from Tectona grandis wood waste with homogeneous and three-layer heterogeneous compositions for commercial purposes. BioResources. 17(3):5011-5020, 2022. https://doi.org/10.15376/biores.17.3.5011-5020, 5959. Souza MV, Silva SAM, Cazella PHS, Rodrigues FR, Carneiro TEB, Pinto EM, Martins AR, Aouada MRM, Christoforo AL. 2023. Painéis aglomerados com resíduo de Pinus caribaea var. caribaea com adesivo bicomponente sustentável. Ambiente Construído. 23(3):263-276. https://doi.org/10.1590/s1678-86212023000300686).

Water absorption presented a positive correlation with the thickness swelling, where increases in absorption impacted in increases in swelling. Negative correlations with modulus of rupture, modulus of elasticity and perpendicular tensile were verified, where increases in water absorption reduced these three mechanical properties. A similar effect was verified in the thickness swelling. Positive correlations were obtained for three mechanical properties, where increases in the average modulus of rupture are related to increases in modulus of elasticity and perpendicular tensile (Table 6). This behavior was also confirmed by (6060. Souza MV, Cazella PHS, Bispo RA, Herradon MP, Santos Junior AJ, Alves MLXFN, Chotolli DL, Aouada MRM, Christoforo AL, Silva SAM. 2025. Use of Eucalyptus urophylla waste as raw material in composite particleboards. Revista Maderas. Ciencia y Tecnología. 27: e1925. https://doi.org/10.22320/s0718221x/2025.19).

3.6. Scanning electron microscopy ↑

In the context of particleboards, scanning electron microscopy (SEM) test allows a detailed analysis of the internal structure of the material, revealing the distribution and size of the wood particles, as well as the quality of the bonds between the particles and the binding resin. This information is essential for understanding the durability and physical and mechanical properties of panels, enabling improvements in the manufacturing processes and the final product quality.

In order to analyze the SEM images, two images with different resolutions are presented to show and highlight the details of the area scanned by the SEM for each studied trait (Figures 2 and 3).

(a)

(b)

Figure 2. SEM images and details for trait with PUR (50% pine with 40% PET and 10% PUR) for: (a) 1 mm and (b) 10 µm resolutions.

(a)

(b)

Figure 3. SEM images and details for trait without PUR (50% pine with 50% PET and 0% PUR) for: (a) 1 mm and (b) 20 µm resolutions

Considering the SEM of trait with PUR (50% pine with 40% PET and 10% PUR), the region under analysis is completely enveloped by PET and PUR. It is not possible to identify details of the anatomical structures of the wood. A very relevant analysis of the region is evidenced in the green-highlighted squares (Figure 2b), where we can observe the ruptured part of the material, with morphology characteristic of rounded ruptures of polymers originating from PET and PUR.

Comparing this SEM of glued-particleboard (Figure 2) with the SEM of trait without PUR (50% pine with 50% PET and 0% PUR), it is possible to verify the existence of evidence of wood structures. These aspects differentiate the morphology between images. Surface aspects presented in Figure 3 are quite different compared to both images in Figure 2. These aspects characterize and define the presence of PUR in the images in Figure 2 and of PET in the images in Figure 3. Regarding glue-free particleboards in Figure 3b, we can see two regions under the PET influence. The region of blue-highlighted square shows some aspects of the wood substrate covered by PET, while yellow-highlighted square presents the presence of fibrillar elements, which is one of the main characteristics of PET fracture.

4. CONCLUSIONS ↑

From foregoing, the statistical analyses and scanning electron microscopy images indicated that:

Supplementary information ↑

Funding sources

The authors express their heartfelt thanks for the financial assistance granted by National Research Council of Thailand.

Supplementary material

Not applicable.

Data availability

Not applicable.

Acknowledgements

The authors thank the Civil Engineering Postgraduate Program of the São Paulo State University Júlio de Mesquita Filho (UNESP) and Alternative Construction Materials research group (MAC).

Authorship contribution statement

Ananda Galbiati Barrera de Paula e Silva: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Resources, Software, Supervision, Validation, Visualization, Writing - original draft, Writing - review & editing.

Matheus Viana de Souza: Supervision, Validation, Visualization, Writing - original draft, Writing - review & editing.

Felipe Reis Rodrigues: Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Resources, Validation, Visualization.

Victor Almeida De Araujo: Supervision, Validation, Visualization, Writing - original draft, Writing - review & editing.

Rodrigo Andraus Bispo: Investigation, Methodology, Resources, Validation.

Vitória Bortolotti de La Libera: Investigation, Methodology, Resources, Validation.

Lucas Eduardo Dezen: Investigation, Methodology, Resources, Validation.

André Luis Christoforo: Formal analysis, Supervision, Validation, Visualization, Writing - review & editing.

Sérgio Augusto Mello da Silva: Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Project administration, Methodology, Resources, Supervision, Validation, Visualization.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no known financial conflicts of interest or personal relationships that could have influenced the work reported in this article.

Statement on the use of Artificial Intelligence

Not applicable.

REFERENCES ↑

1. SNIF – Sistema Nacional de Informações Florestais. 2020. Boletim SNIF 2020: dados sobre o setor florestal brasileiro. Brasília: Ministério da Agricultura, Pecuária e Abastecimento, Serviço Florestal Brasileiro.

2. ABIMCI – Associação Brasileira da Indústria de Madeira Processada Mecanicamente. 2020. Dados estatísticos do setor de madeira processada mecanicamente. Curitiba: ABIMCI.

3. ABIMOVEL – Associação Brasileira da Indústria de Móveis. 2020. Relatório anual de consumo de madeira no setor moveleiro. Brasília: ABIMOVEL.

4. Pedzik M, Janiszewska D, Rogozinski T. 2021. Alternative lignocellulosic raw materials in particleboard production: A review. Ind. Crops Prod. 174:114162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indcrop.2021.114162

5. De Araujo V, Vasconcelos J, Lahr F, Christoforo A. 2022. Timber forest products: A way to intensify global bioeconomy from bio-materials. Acta Fac. Xylologiae Zvolen. 64(1):99-111. https://doi.org/10.17423/afx.2022.64.1.09

6. Guimarães Júnior JB. 2008. Painéis de madeira de eucalipto: estudo de caso de espécies e procedências. M.Sc. Dissertation. Universidade Federal de Lavras, Lavras.

7. Araujo CKC, de Campos CI, Camargo SKCA, Camargo BS. 2019. Caracterização mecânica de painéis particulados de média densidade produzidos a partir de resíduos de madeira. Revista Gestão Industrial 15(1):197-211. https://doi.org/10.3895/gi.v15n1.9159

8. Iwakiri S, Trianoski R. 2020. Painéis de madeira reconstituída. 2nd.ed. Curitiba: Fundação de Pesquisas Florestais do Paraná. pp-1.259.

9. Mendes LM, Mendes RF, Guimararães Júnior JB, Santos RC, César AAS. 2012. Efeito da associação de bagaço de cana, do tipo e do teor de adesivo na produção de painéis aglomerados. Santa Maria: Ciência Florestal.

10. Bertolini MS. 2011. Emprego de resíduos de Pinus sp tratado com preservantes CCB na produção de chapas de partículas homogêneas utilizando resina poliuretano à base de mamona. M.Sc. dissertation. Universidade de São Paulo, São Carlos.

11. ABIPET – Associação Brasileira da Indústria do PET. 2018. Panorama da indústria do PET no Brasil. São Paulo: ABIPET.

12. ABIPET – Associação Brasileira da Indústria do PET. 2022. Censo da reciclagem do PET no Brasil: relatório de 2022. São Paulo: ABIPET

13. ABNT – Associação Brasileira de Normas Técnicas. 2013. NBR 14810-3: Adesivos para madeira - Determinação do teor de sólidos e viscosidade do adesivo poliuretânico. Rio de Janeiro: ABNT.

14. ABNT – Associação Brasileira de Normas Técnicas. 2013. NBR 14810-1: Chapas de madeira aglomerada - Parte 1: Terminologia. Rio de Janeiro, 2013.

15. ABNT – Associação Brasileira de Normas Técnicas. 2018. NBR 14810-2: Chapas de madeira aglomerada - Parte 2: Requisitos. Rio de Janeiro, 2018.

16. ASTM – American Society for Testing and Materials. 2016. ASTM D905-08: Standard test method for strength properties of adhesive bonds in shear by compression loading. West Conshohocken: ASTM International.

17. Iwakiri S. 2005. Painéis de madeira reconstituída. Curitiba: Fundação de Pesquisas Florestais do Paraná.

18. Trianoski R. 2020. Adesivos para painéis de madeira: desenvolvimento e aplicações. Curitiba: Editora Técnica Florestal.

19. Maloney TM. 1993. Modern Particleboard & dry-process fiberboard manufacturing. San Francisco: Miller Freeman Publications.

20. Coutinho FMB, Delpech MC. 1999. Poliuretanos como materiais de revestimento de superfície. Polímeros 9:41-48.

21. Mölleken RE. 2017. Aplicação do adesivo poliuretano derivado do óleo de mamona na obtenção de painéis de madeira colados lateralmente. 2017. M.Sc. Dissertation. Universidade Tecnológica Federal do Paraná, Curitiba.

22. Jesus JMH. 2000. Estudo do adesivo poliuretano à base de mamona em madeira laminada colada (MLC). D.Sc. Thesis. Universidade de São Paulo, São Carlos.

23. Anjos e Silva SD, Andres A, Ueno B, Flores CA, Gomes CB, Pillon CN, Anthonisen D, Machado EB, Theisen G, Magnani M, Wrege MS, Aires RF. 2005. A cultura da Mamona na região de clima temperado: informações preliminares. 1st.ed. Pelotas: Embrapa Clima Temperado. pp.6-23.

24. Araújo LCR. 1992. Caracterização química e mecânica de poliuretanas elastoméricas baseadas em materiais oleoquímicos. M.Sc. dissertation. Universidade de São Paulo, São Carlos.

25. Wechsler A, Zaharia M, Crosky A, Jones H, Ramírez M, Ballerini A, Nuñez M, Sahajwalla V. 2013. Macadamia (Macadamia integrifolia) shell and castor (Rícinos communis) oil based sustainable particleboard: a comparison of its properties with conventional wood-based particleboard. Mater. Des. 50:117-123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2013.03.008

26. Maderuelo-Sanz R, García-Cobos FJ, Sánchez-Delgado FJ, Meneses-Rodríguez JM, Mota-López MI 2022. Mechanical and acoustical evaluation of bio-based composites made of cork granulates for acoustic ceiling tiles. Mater. Construcc. 72(347):e295. https://doi.org/10.3989/mc.2022.15221

27. Suoware TO, Edelugo SO, Ugwu BN, Amula E, Digitemie IE 2019. Development of flame retarded composite fibreboard for building applications using oil palm residue. Mater. Construcc. 69(335):e197. https://doi.org/10.3989/mc.2019.10418

28. Ezzahrae MF, Nacer A, Latifab E, Abdellah Z, Mohamed I, Jammoukh M. 2023. Thermal and mechanical properties of a High-density Polyethylene (HDPE) composite reinforced with wood flour. Mater. Today Proc. 72(7):3602-3608. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2022.08.394

29. Stark NM, Cai Z. 2021. Wood-based composite materials: panel products, glued laminated timber, structural composite lumber, and wood-non wood composites. In: Wood handbook – wood as an engineering material. General Technical Report FPL-GTR-282. Madison: Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Forest Products Laboratory. p.543.

30. Junxiong H, Zhinan W, Liping L, Chuigen G. 2023. Value-added utilization of corncob hydrolysis residues: preparation of reinforced wood-plastic composite with highly water resistance and decay resistance. Ind. Crops Prod. 195:116497. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indcrop.2023.116497

31. Dharmaratne PD, Galabada H, Nilmini R, Jayasinghe R, Halwatura RU. 2021. Preliminary investigation of the suitability of coir fiber and thermoplastic waste as a construction material. Engineer. 54(4):65-74. https://doi.org/10.4038/engineer.v54i4.7471

32. Chotikhun A, Kittijaruwattanna J, Arsyad WM, Salca E, Hadi Y, Hiziroglu S. 2022. Some properties of wood plastic composites made from rubberwood, recycled plastic and silica. Forests. 13(3):427. https://doi.org/10.3390/f13030427

33. Lopez YM, Paes JB, Gustave D, Gonçalves FG, Méndez FC, Nantet ACT. 2020. Production of wood-plastic composites using Cedrela odorata sawdust waste and recycled thermoplastics mixture from post-consumer products – A sustainable approach for cleaner production in Cuba. J. Clean. Prod. 244:118723. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118723

34. Allaf RM, Albarahmieh E, Futian M. 2020. Preparation of sawdust-filled recycled-pet composites via solid state compounding. Processes 8(1):100. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr8010100

35. Lopez YM, Paes J, Rodríguez E, Gustave D, Gonçalves FG. 2018. Wood particleboards reinforced with thermoplastics to improve th ickness swelling and mechanical properties. Cerne 24(4):369-378. https://doi.org/10.1590/01047760201824042582

36. Rahman KS, Islam M, Rahman MM, Hannan MO, Dungani R, Khalil H. 2013.Flat-pressed wood plastic composites from sawdust and recycled polyethylene terephthalate (PET): physical and mechanical properties. SpringerPlus. 2:629. https://doi.org/10.1186/2193-1801-2-629

37. Rahman KS, Islam MN, Ratul SB, Hasan ND, Musa S, Hannan MO. 2018. Properties of flat-pressed wood plastic composites as a function of particle size and mixing ratio. J. Wood Science. 64:279-286. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10086-018-1702-3

38. Campos PHS, Junior AJS, Souza, MV, Herradon MP, Libera VBL, Dezen LE, da Silva ÉV, e Silva AGBP, Rodrigues FR, Bispo RA, Cazella PHS, da Silva SAM, Christoforo AL 2023. Evaluation and production of high-strength wood composite panels with polyethylene terephthalate (PET). BioResources. 18(4):8528-8535. https://doi.org/10.15376/biores.18.4.8528-8535

39. Cazella PHS, Souza MV, Rodrigues FR, Silva SAM, Bispo RA, Araujo V, Christoforo AL. 2024. Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) as a recycled raw material for particleboards produced from Pinus wood and biopolymer resin. J. Clean. Prod. 447:141460. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2024.141460

40. Azevedo EC 2009. Efeito da radiação nas propriedades mecânicas do adesivo de poliuretano derivado de óleo de mamona. D.Sc. Thesis. Universidade Federal do Paraná, Curitiba, 2009.

41. Fiorelli J, Bueno SB, Cabral MR. 2019. Assessment of multilayer particleboards produced with green coconut and sugarcane bagasse fibers. Constr. Build. Mater. 205:1-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.02.024

42. Celestino VRB 2020. Estudo do comportamento físico e mecânico de painéis aglomerados fabricados com partículas de Tectona grandis e Corymbia citriodora. D.Sc. thesis. Universidade Estadual Paulista, Bauru.

43. Borysiuk M, Piasecki J, Polak M. 2020. Effect of wood particles drying on the properties of wood composites. Compos. B Eng. 182:107586.

44. Klímek P, Morávek T, Ráhel J, Stupavská M, Decky D, Král PI, Kúdela J, Wimmer R. 2016. Utilization of air-plasma treated waste polyethylene terephthalate particles as a raw material for particleboard production. Compos. B Eng. 90:188-194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2015.12.019

45. ABNT – Associação Brasileira de Normas Técnicas. 2003. NBR NM 248: Determinação da composição granulométrica de materiais particulados. Rio de Janeiro, 2003.

46. Trevisan CG. 2021. Painéis aglomerados homogêneos produzidos com partículas de pinus e seringueira e aglutinados com adesivo poliuretano derivado de óleo de mamona – avaliação das propriedades físicas e mecânicas. M.Sc. dissertation, Universidade Estadual Paulista, Ilha Solteira.

47. Bispo RA (2021). Produção e avaliação de painéis de partículas de fibra de coco, pínus e eucalipto aglutinadas com adesivo poliuretano derivado de óleo de mamona. M.Sc. dissertation, Universidade Estadual Paulista, Ilha Solteira.

48. ABNT – Associação Brasileira de Normas Técnicas. 2017. NBR 6458: Grãos de pedregulho retidos na peneira de abertura 4,8 mm - Determinação da massa específica, da massa específica aparente e da absorção de água. Rio de Janeiro, ABNT.

49. ABNT – Associação Brasileira de Normas Técnicas. 2016. NBR 6457: Preparação de amostras para ensaios de compactação, caracterização e determinação do teor de umidade. Rio de Janeiro, ABNT.

50. Silva RM. 2018. Granulometria e suas influências na produção de painéis aglomerados. Jornal de Materiais e Engenharia 9(1):30-38.

51. Buzo ALSC, Sugahara ES, Silva SAM, Morales EAM, Azambuja MA. 2019.Painéis de Pinus e bagaço de cana empregando-se dois adesivos para uso na construção civil. Ambiente Construído. 19:183-193. https://doi.org/10.1590/s1678-86212019000400350

52. Sugahara ES, Silva SAM, Buzo ALSC, Campos C, Morales E, Ferreira BS, Azambuja MDA, Lahr F, Christoforo AL. 2019. High-density particleboard made from agro-industrial waste and differente adhesives. Bioresources. 14(3):5162-5170. https://doi.org/10.15376/biores.14.3.5162-5170

53. ANSI – American National Standards Institute. 2016. ANSI A208.1: Particleboard. Washington, ANSI.

54. Trianoski R. 2010. Avaliação do potencial de espécies florestais alternativas, de rápido crescimento, para produção de painéis de madeira aglomerada. D.Sc. dissertation. Universidade Federal do Paraná, Curitiba.

55. Dotun AO, Adesoji AA, Oluwatimilehin AC. 2018. Physical and mechanical properties evaluation of particle board produced from saw dust and plastic waste. Int. J. Eng. Res. Afr. 40:1-8. https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/JERA.40.1

56. Santos JA, Oliveira MA, Lima PA. 2011. Influência de resíduo de madeira na produção de painéis aglomerados. Revista Brasileira de Engenharia de Materiais 13(3):200-210.

57. Gilio CG. 2020. Avaliação de painéis de maravalhas homogêneas empregando-se madeira de Hevea brasiliensis e Tectona grandis, aglutinadas com adesivo poliuretano derivado de óleo de mamona. M.Sc. dissertation. Universidade Estadual Paulista, Ilha Solteira.

58. Souza MV, Silva SAM, Cazella PHS, Rodrigues FR, Bonfim KS, Sanches AO, Araujo VA, Santos HF, Pinto EM, Christoforo AL, Aouada MRM, Aouada FA, Lahr FA. Particleboards manufactured from Tectona grandis wood waste with homogeneous and three-layer heterogeneous compositions for commercial purposes. BioResources. 17(3):5011-5020, 2022. https://doi.org/10.15376/biores.17.3.5011-5020

59. Souza MV, Silva SAM, Cazella PHS, Rodrigues FR, Carneiro TEB, Pinto EM, Martins AR, Aouada MRM, Christoforo AL. 2023. Painéis aglomerados com resíduo de Pinus caribaea var. caribaea com adesivo bicomponente sustentável. Ambiente Construído. 23(3):263-276. https://doi.org/10.1590/s1678-86212023000300686

60. Souza MV, Cazella PHS, Bispo RA, Herradon MP, Santos Junior AJ, Alves MLXFN, Chotolli DL, Aouada MRM, Christoforo AL, Silva SAM. 2025. Use of Eucalyptus urophylla waste as raw material in composite particleboards. Revista Maderas. Ciencia y Tecnología. 27: e1925. https://doi.org/10.22320/s0718221x/2025.19