United States

Department of
Agriculture Fiberboard and
Forest Service
Forest
Hardboard
Products
Laboratory
Research at the
General
Technical
Report
FPL-47
Forest Products
Laboratory
A 50-Year Summary
Abstract On the Cover

Many changes have occurred in the Top. Racking test of full-scale (9-by
fiber-based panel products industries 14-ft) wall section with fiberboard
during the past 50 years. During this sheathing conducted at FPL in
timespan the Forest Products 1932.
Laboratory has conducted a Bottom. Small-scale (2-by 2-ft) wall
considerable amount of research on racking test developed at FPL in
processing and product evaluation of 1976 as an economical way to
fiber-based panel product materials. augment full-scale testing.
Unfortunately about 26 percent of this
information was never published.
This report compiles all of the studies
completed during this timespan and
briefly summarizes what was
accomplished.
Keywords: Hardboard, fiberboard,
summary, processing, raw materials,
properties, performance.

October 1985

Myers, Gary C.; McNatt, J. Dobbin Fiberboard

and hardboard research at the Forest Products
Laboratory: A 50-year summary. Gen. Tech. Rep.
FPL-47. Madison, WI: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service, Forest Products
Laboratory; 1985. 39 p.
A limited number of free copies of this
publication are available to the public from the
Forest Products Laboratory, One Gifford Pinchot
Drive, Madison, WI 53705. Laboratory publications
are sent to over 1,000 libraries in the United States
and elsewhere.
The Laboratory is maintained in cooperation with
the University of Wisconsin.
Contents

Page

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Manufacturing and Raw Material Variables . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Fiber Resources, 2; Fiber Preparation, 2
Additives and Fiber Treatments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Sizing Materials, 8; Resins, 8; Other Additives, 11
Forming Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Hot-pressing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Post-treatment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Correlation Between Manufacturing Variables and
Hardboard Performance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Physical Properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Equilibrium Moisture Content (EMC), 16; Linear
Expansion, 16; Water Adsorption and Thickness
Swelling, 16; Thermal Conductivity, 17; Dielectric
Properties, 17; Fire Performance, 18; Acoustical
Absorption and Sound Transmission, 19
Mechanical Fastener Performance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Screwholding, 19; Lateral Nail Resistance, 19; Wall
Racking Strength, 19; Lateral Staple Resistance, 23
Hardboard Glue-Bond Strength . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Hardboard Machining Properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Basic Strength and Elastic Properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Effects of Loading Conditions and Specimen
Dimensions on Mechanical Properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Effect of Moisture on Physical and Mechanical
Properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
Hardboard and Fiberboard Durability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
Hardboard and Fiberboard Performance in Use . . . . . . . . 30
Structural Sandwich Panels, 30; Stressed-Skin
Panels, 30; Roof Support Systems, 30; Hardboard in
Shipping Pallets, 30
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
Availability of Studies Cited . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
Sources of Free Information, 38; Sources which
Charge a Fee, 38; Addresses of Sources, 38;
Availability of Specific Journals, 39; Items Available
from Forest Products Laboratory, 39; Other Sources
of Information, 39
Fiberboard and Hardboard
Research at the Forest
Products Laboratory
A 50-Year Summary

Gary C. Myers, Research Forest Products Technologist

J. Dobbin McNatt, Research Forest Products Technologist

Forest Products Laboratory, Madison, WI

Introduction

The Forest Products Laboratory, U.S. Different terms have been used to A more recent development is
Department of Agriculture, Forest identify the various panel products medium-density fiberboard (MDF),
Service, has been conducting research made from wood fibers and intended which combines the technologies of the
on fiber-based panel products since the primarily for building construction and hardboard and particleboard industries.
early 1930’s (Luxford 1932), and was furniture and cabinet manufacture. The There was much debate over the
probably the only public institution Wood Handbook (Forest Products definition of MDF until the American
actively engaged in systematic wood Laboratory 1974) refers to them as Hardboard Association and the National
research during the 1930’s and early “building fiberboards.” The American Particleboard Association jointly
1940’s. This report is a compilation of Society for Testing and Materials sponsored an American National
all the studies completed at the definitions (ASTM 1978a) refer to them Standards Institute standard for MDF
Laboratory and a summary of what was as “fibrous-felted boards,” divided (ANSI 1980). Medium-density
accomplished. About 26 percent of the further into “structural insulating boards” fiberboard is manufactured from wood
references and findings were never (less than 31 pounds per cubic foot fibers combined with a synthetic resin,
published, but are on file at the (Ib/ft3)) and “hardboards” (greater than usually urea formaldehyde, and is
Laboratory. These findings were not 31 Ib/ft3). In this paper “cellulosic intended for interior use. It has been
made public because the scientist did fiberboard” means wood-fiber panels of replacing other panel products in the
not think existent information justified 10 to 31 lb/ft3 . furniture industry, and has experienced
publication or because the information Cellulosic fiberboard, the oldest of the phenomenal growth in the United
was presented in a letter or report to fiber-base panels, was developed in States and worldwide.
another agency or to industry as part of 191 4. The production of cellulosic
a cooperative venture. fiberboard has peaked and is now
In addition to the experimental declining. A process for manufacturing
research reported here, FPL has also a hard-pressed fiberboard (hardboard)
produced information (FPL resource was developed in 1926. Hardboard
bulletins) on hardboard and fiberboard production has been increasing, with
raw material requirements, production, some of the biggest gains occurring in
and uses (Dickerhoof 1978a, 1978b; hardboard siding. High-density
Dickerhoof and McKeever 1979; hardboard is also starting to find uses
McKeever 1979). as a structural material (McNatt 1980).
Manufacturing and
Raw Material Variables

Fiber Resources Regardless of the source, many chips laboratory-size Asplund Defibrator
become moldy or begin to decay during (Razzaque 1962; Schwartz 1958a;
Fiber can be obtained from a multitude storage in large piles. The effect of this Schwartz and Baird 1952; Steinmetz
of sources besides the traditional deterioration on hardboards made from 1968). Two studies (Schwartz 1963b,
pulpwood. One good source is waste chips was investigated by Myers Schwartz and Baird 1950a) measured
from other primary forest products (1983), Razzaque (1962), Schwartz and the amount of power consumed during
processes, including sawmill wastes Chaline (1950b). Generally, they found the refining of hardboard furnish in
(Schwartz and others 1947a, 1947b, a strength reduction and/or an increase laboratory-size attrition mills. Schwartz
1950a; Turner and Kern 1956; Forest in linear movement. (1958b) and Steinmetz (1973)
Products Laboratory 1950), logging investigated effects of the type and
wastes (Schwartz and others 1947b), Fiber Preparation severity of the fiber preparation
chipper rejects and various pulpmill procedures on yield of fiber (table 4).
wastes (Forest Products Laboratory Before it is possible to make any type Schwartz (1958b) showed also how the
1950), and veneer scrap (Schwartz of fiberboard, it is necessary to break fiber yield influences wet-forming
1951c). Schwartz and Baird (1952) down the raw material into individual characteristics and board performance
made an early attempt to use fibers or fiber bundles. These are (table 5). Steinmetz (1973) made some
branchwood only as a fiber source, and generally lignocellulose fibers obtained attempt to remove extractives with hot
more recently Steinmetz and Fahey from some form of wood chip. Several water and dilute caustic washes to
(1 979) described the use for this means of reducing wood chips to fibers improve the suitability of some wood
purpose of whole tree material, which is have been examined in the past, when species for hardboard manufacture
the entire aboveground portion of the limitations of laboratory equipment (fig. 1).
tree. Laundrie and McNatt (1975) largely controlled the type of study Several fiber characteristics can
investigated urban forest as a source of conducted. The Laboratory possessed ultimately affect board performance.
diseased trees for use in hardboard. an assortment of chemical pulp Several studies (Nelson 1973, Schwartz
They also considered industrial discards digesters, various sizes and types of and Baird 1950a, Steinmetz and Fahey
of used pallets, and wood from old atmospheric pulp refiners, and a small 1971, Turner and Kern 1956) have
railroad cars, while Steinmetz (1974) laboratory-size Asplund Defibrator. shown how the different screen
considered waxed corrugated as a Nearly all of the studies on fiber fractions can affect drainage rate on the
source of fiber. Both Laundrie and preparation that were completed were machine as well as appearance and
McNatt (1975) and Schwartz (1951a) part of other, perhaps larger, studies. performance of the board. Hrubesky
investigated municipal solid wastes Few, if any, had fiber preparation as a (1949) and Hrubesky and Perot (1954)
which contain large quantities of primary objective. showed drainage rate is sensitive to
wastepapers. Laundrie and McNatt In a few studies (Razzaque 1962; other variables also. Nelson (1 973)
(1975) also investigated the much Schwartz et al. 1947b, 1950b) mild showed that the amount of lignin
cleaner and more uniform household chemical cooks, followed by refining or originally present in the fiber and the
wastepaper and newsprint, and mechanical agitation, were used to amount remaining after preparation can
Schwartz (1951a) investigated some prepare fibers for board manufacture. In also affect board performance; he
rather unusual waste products from one study (Turner and others 1948) raw demonstrated the great importance of
processing agricultural commodities. wood chips were passed through an pH as a fiber characteristic, because it
These included peanut hulls, chicken atmospheric attrition mill in an attempt can affect the resin cure and ultimately
feathers, leather scraps, and fibrous to obtain fibers for board manufacture. board performance. Myers (1977,
material from cattle stomachs. By far the majority of the investigations 1978), however, showed that to a
Many species of trees have been concerned either steam-cooking at certain extent the negative effects of
investigated to determine if they are diverse temperatures and times low fiber pH can be overcome.
suitable for manufacturing hardboards. followed by some form of atmospheric
These include many domestic attrition milling (McGovern and others
hardwoods, domestic softwoods, and 1949; Schwartz 1951c; Schwartz and
some foreign woods (table 1). Nelson others 1947b, 1950b, 1952), or
(1 973) examined wood specific gravity investigating different pressures and
and fiber length of eight species other operating parameters of the
(table 2) in greater detail to determine
their influence on medium-density
hardboard performance (table 3).

2
Table 1 .–Species evaluated for hardboard and insulation board

Common name Botanical name Reference

DOMESTIC HARDWOODS

ash -- Schwartz 1951b

aspen Populus tremuloides Schwartz and Heinig 1947a, Steinmetz
1968, Steinmetz and Fahey 1979, USDA
Forest Service 1950

basswood Tilia americana L. Schwartz 1951b

boxelder Acer negundo L. Nelson 1973
beech Fagus grandifolia Ehrh. Schwartz 1960b
elm Ulmus americana L. Laundrie and McNatt 1975, Schwartz 1951 b
red alder Alnus rubra Bong. Schwartz 1958b
red oak Quercus rubra L. Lewis and Heebink 1971; Myers 1977, 1978;
Steinmetz 1973

sand hickory Carya pallida (Ashe) Engl. Schwartz and Baird 1952
and Graebn.
soft maple -- Schwartz 1951b
southern oaks -- Lewis and Heebink 1971, Schwartz 1958b
(3 red and 3 white)
sugar maple Acer saccharum Marsh. Schwartz 1951b, 1955, 1960b
sweetgum Liquidambar styraciflua L. Rosenfeld 1959
sycamore Plantanus occidentalis L. Laundrie and Fahey 1973
white birch Betula papyrifera Marsh. Schwartz 1960b
white oak Quercus alba L. Lewis and Heebink 1971; Nelson 1973;
Schwartz 1953b, 1963a, 1963b

DOMESTIC SOFTWOODS

Alaska cedar Chamaecyparis nootkatensis Nelson 1973

(D. Don.) Spach
balsam fir Abies balsamea (L.) Mill. Myers 1977, 1978; Nelson 1973;
Schwartz 1963b

Douglas-fir Pseudotsuga menziesii (Mirb.) Nelson 1973; Schwartz 1958a, 1963a;

Franco Schwartz and Baird 1950a, 1950b
Engelmann spruce Picea engelmannii Parry Schwartz 1958a
hemlock Tsuga canadensis (L.) Carr. Schwartz 1951b
loblolly pine Pinus taeda L. Steinmetz and Fahey 1979
lodgepole pine Pinus contorta Dougl. Schwartz 1958a
northern white cedar Thuja occidentalis L. Nelson 1973
Sitka spruce Picea sitchensis (Bong.) Carr. Nelson 1973
slash pine Pinus elliotti (Engelm.) Nelson 1973

FOREIGN WOODS

caracoli Anacardium excelsum Schwartz and Baird 1948

chestnut Castanea sativa Schwartz 1949
eucalyptus Eucalyptus rostrata Schwartz 1951c
European beech Fagus sylvatica Schwartz 1949, Schwartz and Chaline 1950b
jobo Spondias mombin Schwartz and Baird 1948
mixed tropical
hardwoods (50 species) -- Myers 1979
ohia -- Schwartz 1960a
okume Aucoumea klaineana Schwartz 1951c
orange wood -- Schwartz 1953a
sundri Heritiera minor Razzaque 1962

3
Table 2–Wood specific gravity and fiber length (Nelson 1973)

Factorial class
Species Specific gravity1 Fiber length1
Specific Fiber
gravity length

mm

Low Short Alaska cedar 0.406 (0.403-0.408) 2.65 (2.58-2.72)

Northern white-cedar .260 ( .253- .268) 2.77 (2.74-2.80)

Average .333 2.71

Low Long Sitka spruce .352 ( .340- .365) 3.81 (3.80-3.82)

Balsam fir .332 ( .332- .332) 3.16 (3.04-3.28)

Average .342 3.48

High Short White oak .620 ( .607- .634) 1.14 (1.08-1.21)

Boxelder .452 ( .440- .464) 0.66 (0.64-0.68)

Average .536 0.90

High Long Douglas-fir .448 ( .446- ,451) 3.20 (3.1 7-3.23)

Slash pine .568 ( .545- .592) 4.43 (4.27-4.59)

Average .508 3.82

Low .338 --
High .522 --
Short -- 1.80
Long -- 3.65

1Numbers in parentheses are values for two replicates (range for species); other values are
means.

4
Table 3–Analysis of variance (ANOVA)–hardboard strength properties, dimensional stability, and water
absorption (Nelson 1973)

Significance of F value
Source of variation (effect)

Specific
Hardboard property
Specific Fiber gravity x Species
gravity length fiber within
(wood) (wood) length factorial
(wood) cells

Modulus of rupture *1 NS2 NS **3

**
Modulus of elasticity * * NS
Tensile strength NS NS **
*
Compressive strength NS NS NS NS
Internal bond NS NS NS

Length change from 50 pct RH4 to:

Ovendry NS * NS NS
90 pct RH NS ** NS **
Water-soaked condition * ** NS **

Thickness change from 50 pct RH to:

Ovendry NS * NS NS
90 pct RH NS ** NS **
Water-soaked condition * ** NS *

Weight (moisture) change from 50 pct RH to:

Ovendry NS NS * NS
90 pct RH NS * NS **
Water-soaked condition NS NS NS NS

1 Significant at 0.05 level of probability.

2 Not significant at 0.05 level of probability,

3 Significant at 0.01 level of probability.

4 RH, relative humidity.

5
Table 4.–Processing conditions and yields of pulp for red alder and mixture of oak
fiberized in a laboratory-model Asplund defibrator (Schwartz 1958b)

Processing conditions Pulp

Species Defibrator
run number Steam Presteaming Milling Total Number Yield Asplund
pressure period period time or runs freeness

Lb/in.2 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Min - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Pct s

Red alder 88 175 1 1 2 4 95.2 14

93 175 1 3-112 4-112 4 84.8 16

92 175 1 6 7 8 80.0 18

Mixture of oaks 97 125 1 1 2 4 91.5 12

98 125 1 3-1/2 4-112 4 83.2 18

99 125 1 6 7 4 78.7 22

Table 5.–Properties of hardboards made from red alder and from a mixture of southern oaks (Schwartz 1958b)

Modulus
Molding Defibrator Specific Water Thickness
Yield Size Alum of Toughness
press freeness gravity absorption change
rupture

Pct Lb/in.2 . . . . . . . . Pct . . . . . . . s Lb/in.2 In.lb . . . . . . . . . . . . .Pct . . . . . . . . . . . .

per in.
of width

RED ALDER

95.2 500 0 1 40 .98 7,350 11.0 60.0 36.0

95.2 500 1 1 40 .98 5,100 8.0 28.3 20.6
84.8 500 0 1 43 1.04 8,460 12.8 49.0 29.4
84.8 500 1 1 41 1.03 6,340 9.7 25.5 19.2
80.0 500 0 1 43 1.08 8,330 10.0 42.4 25.6
80.0 500 1 1 42 1.05 '5,210 9.4 18.0 14.7

OAK MIXTURE

91.5 500 0 8 38 .98 6,330 6.6 49.5 26.1

91.5 500 1 8 39 1.01 5,100 5.0 18.9 18.9
83.2 500 0 8 42 1.04 7,480 7.5 40.9 23.4
83.2 500 1 8 44 1.03 5,750 6.3 18.9 15.6
78.7 500 0 8 41 1.06 6,380 4.0 27.8 14.4
78.7 500 112 6 43 1.05 5,720 4.4 18.7 12.8
1 This value is low. The variability of the results obtained is reflected by this value, which is in variance with the overall data.

6
Figure 1.–Relationship of modulus of rupture to fiber treatment of wet-
formed red oak hardboards. Steinmetz 1973. (M141 229)

7
Additives and
Fiber Treatments

Sizing Materials Resins Powdered thermoplastic resins are

considerably cheaper than phenolic
Some form of sizing material is Phenol-formaldehyde resins are resins, and several studies have been
added to the fibers in the manufacture usually added to high- and medium- conducted to utilize them in hardboard
of all wet-formed, and most dry-formed density hardboards to improve their manufacturing (Schwartz 1963b,
hardboard. Some of these materials strength and dimensional change Steinmetz 1977, Steinmetz and Fahey
impart moisture resistance or help affix properties. Not all phenolic resins are 1971). Generally, considerably more
other additives to the fiber in wet- the same, and many are formulated for thermoplastic resin has to be used to
forming. Petroleum wax (paraffin-like a specific plant and process. Nearly all equal the quality achieved with phenolic
material) is usually added to both wet- of the phenolic resin used in hardboard resins. Thermoplastic resins can also
and dry-formed hardboard to impart manufacture is liquid, but Myers (1 976) be combined with phenolic resins, in
more moisture resistance (Egerstrand and Steinmetz and Fahey (1 968) have which case less phenolic resin is used,
and Schwartz 1950). Aluminum sulfate made trials in which powdered but the overall resin content must be
and sulfuric acid are routinely added to phenolics have also been used to make greater than when phenolic is used
wet-formed hardboard to affix an hardboards or low-density panel alone (Steinmetz and Fahey 1968).
emulsified paraffin-like material and products. Fahey and Pierce (1973) and Schwartz and Heinig (1947)
phenolic resin to the fiber, so they Steinmetz (1 977) investigated the processed neutral sulfite semichemical
remain when the water is drained away effects of four variables (low- and pulp in a beater until it gelatinized, and
(Schwartz and Chaline 1950b). medium-viscosity, bonding- and used it as a binder for insulation board
Egerstrand and Schwartz (1950) impregnating-type resins) on hardboard made from sawdust, at a gelatinized
attempted to substitute aluminum properties such as strength, dimension pulp binder content of 15 percent. In
stearate and ferric stearate for change and water adsorption. The the same study they looked into the
aluminum sulfate or ferric sulfate. lower viscosity and penetrating-type possibility of using an identical binder
These materials gave as good water phenolic resins had their greatest effect concentration of repulped, but not
resistance as paraffin wax, but they on dimension and weight change gelatinized, old newspapers.
reduced flexural strength. results, whereas the higher viscosity Steinmetz (1977) made an attempt to
Schwartz and Chaline (1950a) and bonding-type phenolic resins had a use a two-part epoxy resin as a binder
showed that the presence or absence greater effect on strength. One would for hardboard manufacture.
of a sizing material, when coupled with expect the amount of phenolic resin Unfortunately the epoxy resin viscosity
pressing temperatures, made a used to affect hardboard properties, was so high it could not be sprayed
difference in board performance and several studies (Myers 1976, onto the fiber, so no hardboards were
(table 6). Schwartz (1953b, 1958a) Steinmetz 1973, Steinmetz and Fahey manufactured.
showed that the type and amount of 1971) have shown they do so to Many MDF plants use radiofrequency
sizing used definitely influenced board different extents. Sometimes the (RF) waves to hasten the
properties (table 7), usually increasing addition of a little more resin has been ureaformaldehyde adhesive cure.
water resistance but reducing modulus decisive to success in meeting instead Unfortunately, MDF made with
of rupture, and specific sizing of falling below specified strength urea-formaldehyde adhesive can only
requirements had to be adjusted for criteria, improving dimensional stability, be used in interior applications.
each fiber. Schwartz (1958b) found that or being able to utilize a wood species Phenolic adhesive cannot be used with
increasing the aluminum sulfate content that might otherwise be considered RF curing because it causes arcing and
above 2 percent generally decreased all unacceptable. Because phenolic resins burning problems. By using a phenol-
strength properties, but this is are relatively expensive, hardboard resorcinol adhesive, Fahey (1976) was
dependent on fiber yield. manufacturers try to use as little as able to make MDF board in a press
possible. with RF curing. The finished board had
much better durability than urea-bonded
board, and could be used outdoors.

8
Table 6.–Hardboards from southern pine, sweetgum, red oak, and cypress sawmill wastes (Schwartz and Chaline 1950a)

Board properties

24-hour water
Pulp Adjusted
Material Stock Hotpressing condition immersion test
Yield Specific modulus
of
Asplund Maximum gravity of Water Thick-
Rosin Maximum rupture
Refined1 Alum pH free- temper- Time rupture2 absorp- ness
size pressure
ness ature tion increase

Pct - - - - - - Pct - - - - - - s Lb/in/2 °C Min - - - - - - Lb/in.2 - - - - - - - - - - - - Pct - - - - - -

Southern pine 85.2 No 00-13 500 200 10 1.04 4,660 4,300 58.3 36.2
No 00-13 500 240 10 1.03 7,380 7,000 41.2 18.8
Yes 0 0 -- 36 500 200 10 1.04 6,040 5,600 55.2 33.6
Yes 1.5 1.5 4.2 45 500 200 10 1.03 3,740 3,500 25.9 20.6

Unbarked southern
pine slabs 83.0 No 0 0 -- 21 500 200 10 1.01 4,530 4,400 55.5 30.5
No 0 0 -- 21 500 240 10 1.00 6,830 6,800 34.3 16.1
Yes 0 0 -- 47 500 200 10 1.00 5,180 5,200 57.3 29.3
Yes 1.5 1.5 4.25 46 500 200 10 1.02 3,460 3,300 23.7 16.4

Sweetgum 86.8 No 0 0 -- 18 500 200 10 1.03 7,630 7,200 64.1 44.5

No 0 0 -- 18 500 240 10 1.04 9,060 8,400 45.0 21.1
Yes 0 0 -- 44 500 200 10 1.02 7,980 7,700 60.5 39.7
Yes 1.5 1.5 4.4 57 500 200 10 .99 5,060 5,200 30.1 23.2

Red
oak 82.9 No 0 0 -- 29 500 200 10 1.02 6,160 5,900 54.6 34.8
No 0 0 -- 29 500 240 10 1.04 7,720 7,100 34.1 15.1
Yes 0 0 -- 49 500 200 10 1.04 7,260 6,700 53.0 32.6
Yes 1.5 1.5 4.3 56 500 200 10 1.04 4,630 4,300 25.9 18.9

Cypress 88.8 No 00-12 500 200 10 .98 4,700 4,900 54.0 31.9
No 0 0 -- 12 500 240 10 1.02 8,350 8,000 34.2 15.4
Yes 0 0 -- 46 500 200 10 .99 5,530 5,600 54.0 28.1
Yes 1.5 1.5 4.2 61 500 200 10 .98 3,960 4,100 39.1 21.0

Southern pine shavings 81.9 No 0 0 -- 15 500 200 10 1.00 3,640 3,600 52.9 33.6
No 0 0 -- 15 500 240 10 1.06 6,280 5,600 28.6 14.5
Yes 0 0 -- 42 500 200 10 .98 4,770 5,000 54.3 31.3
Yes 1.5 1.5 4.3 59 500 200 10 .98 2,920 3,000 48.9 28.4

40 pct southern pine 85.3 No 0 0 -- 17 500 200 10 1.03 6,380 6,000 54.6 34.6
20 pct sweetgum No 0 0 -- 17 500 240 10 1.08 8,950 7,700 34.3 16.9
20 pct red oak Yes 0 0 -- 48 500 200 10 1.00 6,190 6,200 55.5 32.4
20 pct cypress Yes 1.5 1.5 4.6 80 500 200 10 1.00 3,830 3,800 23.1 16.6

40 pct unbaked southern

pine slabs 83.6 No 0 0 -- 21 500 200 10 .97 4,330 4,600 58.6 3.53
20 pct unbaked sweetgum
slabs No 0 0 -- 21 500 240 10 1.03 6,220 5,900 36.9 17.4
20 pct unbaked red
oak slabs Yes 0 0 -- 37 500 200 10 1.02 5,240 5.000 54.3 32.9
20 pct unbarked cypress
slabs Yes 1.5 1.5 4.2 56 500 200 10 .94 2,970 3,400 25.5 17.2

Hardwood sawdust mixture 70.7 No 0 0 -- 17 500 240 10 .98 2,650 2,800

1Asplund stock refined in an 8inch single-rotating-disk attrition mill.

2 Modulus of rupture adjusted to a specific gravity of 1.0 on the basis that the flexural strength varies as the square of the specific gravity

9
Table 7.–Effect of pulp yield, sizing, and molding on white oak hardboard properties (Schwartz 1953b)

Board data
Sizing data 1 Freeness Hotpressing conditions2
Pulp Refined Modulus of rupture Water Thick-
yield stock (defibrator) Specific
Ferric Temper- absorp- ness
Rosin Alum pH Schedule3 gravity
sulphate ature Original Adjusted 4 tion increase5

Pct - - - - - - - - - Pct - - - - - - - - s °C Min - - - - - Lb/in.2 - - - - - - - - - - -Pct - - - - - -

75.3 No 0 0 0 7.6 34 180 2-1 -7 1.07 5,700 5,000 50 30

81.7 No 0 0 0 7.7 22 180 2-1 -7 1.04 5,700 5,300 67 50
81.7 No6 0 0 0 7.5 23 195 2-1 -7 1.02 5,550 5,300 57 35
75.3 No 0 0 0 7.2 37 240 1-2-7 1.07 7,530 6,600 28 12
81.7 No 0 0 0 7.7 24 240 1-2-7 1.02 6,640 6,400 31 14

81.7 No6 0 0 0 7.5 24 240 1-2-7 1.01 6,140 6,000 30 15

81.7 Yes 0 0 0 7.9 38 240 1-2-7 1.07 8,150 7,100 31 15
75.3 Yes 1.5 1.5 0 4.2 53 180 2-1 -7 1.06 4,540 4,000 42 25
75.3 Yes 1.5 3.0 0 4.2 55 180 2-1 -7 1.06 4,850 4,300 16 13
75.3 Yes 1.5 0 1.5 4.1 64 180 2-1 -7 1.05 5,120 4,600 28 18

75.3 No 1.5 0 3.0 4.2 33 180 2-1 -7 1.07 4,120 3,600 21 17

81.7 No6 0.75 0.75 0 4.3 25 195 2-1 -7 0.98 3,580 3,700 64 41
81.7 Yes 0.75 1.5 0 4.4 39 195 2-1 -7 -- -- -- 37 29
81.7 No6 0.75 0 0.75 4.4 23 195 2-1 -7 1.01 4,460 4,400 64 38
81.7 Yes 0.75 0 1.50 4.2 38 195 2-1 -7 -- -- -- 37 25

75.3 No 0.75 1.5 0 4.2 33 240 1-2-'7 1.08 5,800 5,000 17 10

75.3 No 1.5 1.5 0 4.1 37 240 1-2-7 1.04 4,700 4,300 21 11
81.7 No6 0.75 0.75 0 4.3 26 240 1-2-7 0.99 4,820 4,900 25 13
81.7 Yes 0.75 1.5 0 4.4 46 240 1-2-7 1.04 6,030 5,600 19 12

1 Stocks sized at a consistency of approximately 2 pct.

2 Maximum and minimum pressures were 500 and 100 Ib/in.2, respectively.

3 The first number represents the initial period at maximum pressure; the second number, the breathing period at the minimum pressure; and the
third number, the final period at maximum pressure.

4 Adjusted to specific gravity of 1.0 on the basis that the modulus of rupture varies as the square of the specific gravity.

5 Determined by measurements before and after soaking.

6 Pulp washed with hot water before preparation of board stock. The loss of 2.3 pct of solubles did not materially affect the properties of the
hardboards.

10
Other Additives Nelson (1973) encountered problems cure was speeded up so much that the
in utilizing certain species in dryformed board charred during hot pressing,
An ever-present goal in hardboard hardboard, and identified fiber pH as a resulting in a very brittle hardboard.
manufacturing is to make stronger and significant factor. Myers (1977, 1978) Care had to be exercised with any
more moisture-resistant boards. One tried to overcome this problem by additive to make certain no compatibility
way of doing this during hardboard adding different amounts of caustic or problems arose between the additive
manufacture is through additives such acid to the dry fiber before spraying and phenolic resin, otherwise the result
as phenolic resins, petrolatum, cationic phenolic resin onto the fiber. was hardboard with substandard
resins, linseed oil, an oil diluent, Laundrie and others (1979) and properties.
paraffin, and different fixing agents Myers and Holmes (1975, 1977)
(Schwartz 1963a, Schwartz and Chilson attempted to make hardboard more
1959). Another approach is to take fire-retardant and decay-resistant by
various electrolyte solutions and soak adding various fire retardants or
pressed hardboard in them for various different concentrations of preservatives
time intervals, followed by heat- to the dry fiber during hardboard
treatment. Unfortunately, as Torres and manufacture. These procedures are
Schwartz (1957) showed, these applicable only to the dry-forming
electrolytes are acidic, which causes process. One of the biggest problems
considerable springback, and reduction encountered was incompatibility of
of density and strength. All of these additives and phenolic resins. As a
approaches have been tried only with result, either resin cure was inhibited,
wet-formed hardboard. giving a very weak hardboard, or the

11
Forming Procedures

There are opportunities during the

forming operation to do some things
that alter hardboard performance.
Rosenfeld (1959) made a study in
which hardboard fibers were formed
into thin sheets on the paper machine,
and then cross-laminated and
hot-pressed to form a hardboard.
Unfortunately the properties were no
different from conventionally wet-formed
and pressed hardboard. While making
dry-formed hardboard, Steinmetz (1977)
placed a layer of glass scrim fabric on
both sides of the fiber mat before
hot-pressing. During hot-pressing the
glass fiber was bonded to the
hardboard. This imparted greater
dimensional stability and strength to the
high-density hardboard, but involved
some extra steps in the manufacturing
process. Another way to impart greater
strength and stability to dry-formed
hardboard involves orienting (aligning)
the fiber during the forming procedure.
Steinmetz and Polley (1974)
mechanically aligned fibers, either in
the same or cross-fiber direction, during
the dry-forming operation. Mechanical
properties were improved by this
alignment (figs. 2 and 3), which
involved a more complicated forming
process than usual.

Figure 2.-Relationship of modulus of rupture to quantify and location of

oriented fibers of aspen and Douglas-fir high-density hardboards. (A,
highly oriented; B, partially oriented-one-half of fibers by weight were
oriented; C, partially oriented, oriented fibers concentrated on surface
layers, randomly oriented in center half; D, alternate layers oriented,
fibers in adjacent layers perpendicular to preceding layer; and E,
randomly oriented control board.) Steinmetz and Polley 1974. (M141 025)

12
 Hot-Pressing

During hot-pressing, the

lignocellulosic mat is consolidated
under heat and pressure into
hardboard, moisture in the mat is
removed, phenolic resin is polymerized,
and some naturally occurring bonding
takes place because of lignin flow.
Steinmetz (1970) and Steinmetz and
Fahey (1 971) showed definitely that
temperature of the platens affects the
properties of wet- and dry-formed
hardboards. When pressing
temperature was increased without
increasing hardboard specific gravity,
there was a general improvement in
modulus of rupture (MOR), less water
absorption, and less linear movement
(fig. 4).
Increasing press temperature usually
causes more plasticization of the
fibrous mat, and this results in greater
hardboard specific gravity (Schwartz
and Baird 1950b). When Swamy (1950)
combined higher press temperature
with higher hardboard specific gravity,
strength and stiffness and thickness
swelling increased, whereas water
absorption decreased. Unfortunately,
the resulting hardboards were more
brittle.
When hot-press pressure was
increased by itself, without a
corresponding increase in temperature,
the main effect was to increase board
specific gravity with slightly improved
bending properties. However, Schwartz
(1958b) and Turner and Kern (1 956)
observed no improvement in toughness,
water resistance, or thickness change.

Figure 3.-Relationship of linear dimensional movement to quantity and

location of oriented fibers of aspen and Douglas-fir high-density
hardboards. (See Fig. 2 legend for Key, A-E.) Steinmetz and Polley
1974. (M141 026)

13
Figure 4.-Relationshipbetween linear movement and hot pressing temperature for 1/8-inch-thick
high-density hardboards. Steinmetz 1970. (M137 666)

14
Post-Treatment Correlation Between
Manufacturing Variables
and Hardboard
Performance

Heat treatment of hardboard is a Another post-treatment investigated Turner and others (1948) examined
common and routinely 'performed for improving hardboard that had not 14 different relationships between
industrial post-treatment. It is done in been heat-treated involved the use of manufacturing variables and hardboard
large ovens, and followed by acetic anhydride vapors. Klinga and performance. These included different
humidification prior to shipment from Tarkow (1966) treated the hardboards conditions affecting drainage rates, pulp
the plant. Heat treatment increases to a 5 percent level with vapors, then mat solids contents, dry mat specific
strength properties, decreases the heated them for 16 hours at 212 °F to gravity, and performance of the
amount of moisture absorption and remove all excess chemicals. This resultant hardboard.
dimensional change, but embrittles the treatment resulted in some thickness Millett and Hohf (1948) were
hardboard. Schwartz (1 962) conducted swell, some linear expansion of the concerned with how hardboard
the only study at FPL that looked at hardboard, and a slightly roughened performed when used as a core
slightly different ways to heat-treat surface. On the positive side, the covered with veneer or plywood. By
hardboards, attempting to reach treatment reduced hardboard realizing some of the properties and
temperatures in excess of 338 °F equilibrium moisture content (EMC), limitations built into hardboard, they
without igniting the hardboard. He made reduced linear and thickness demonstrated it was possible to cut and
attempts to use superheated steam, movement, and increased tensile reorient the resultant strips in such a
with temperature ranges from 356 to strength. manner that dimensional movement is
464 °F, to heat-treat hardboard. not a problem in performance of the
Unfortunately, he found heat treatment completed panel product.
at the higher superheated steam
temperatures was ineffective in
reducing water absorption. However,
heat treatment in air at 329 °F was
effective in improving hardboard
properties.
Another procedure commonly utilized
to improve hardboard performance is to
add various oils to the hot board from
the press, before it is heat-treated.
Nothing was done at FPL to find new
oil formulations for the tempering
process. Two studies were conducted
to find substitutes or alternatives to
tempering oils. One of these (Schwartz
and Chilson 1959) involved the addition
of cationic resins during hardboard
fabrication. This resulted in a hardboard
with a more uniform impregnation than
obtainable with tempering oils, but the
hardboards were not as strong or
dimensionally stable as when tempering
oils were used. The other (Torres and
Schwartz 1957) added several water-
soluble electrolytes to the pressed
hardboard and heat-treated afterwards.
This was not very successful because
the electrolyte treatment caused
swelling, and the heat treatment
resulted in weight loss from the
hardboard.

15
Physical Properties

Table 8.-Range of equilibrium moisture contents (EMC) of fiberboard

Equilibrium Moisture and hardboard at different relative humidities as compared to that
Content (EMC) of solid wood1

High temperatures used in Equilibrium

manufacturing cellulosic fiberboards Relative moisture contents Solid wood
and hardboards decrease the humidity (spruce)4
hygroscopicity of the wood fibers. Thus, Fiberboard
Hardboard3
sheathing2
the EMC of these wood fibers is lower
than that of solid wood, particularly at - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Pct - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
higher humidities. Table 8 lists
approximate ranges of EMC for 30 3.4- 6.1 2.4- 5.3 5.3
cellulosic fiberboard (Nordenson 1965)
and for hardboard (McNatt 1969a, 50 4.4- 7.7 3.2- 6.8 8.3
1973, 1974; Nordenson 1965). In all
65 5.3- 9.9 5.1- 8.1 10.6
cases EMC was reached by adsorption
from ovendry, or near ovendry, 80 – 8.5-11.5 14.1
conditions. For comparison, adsorption
values for solid spruce wood (Stamm 90 9.2-17.0 9.0-14.9 17.9
1964) are included in table 8.
Because of sorption hysteresis 1 All materials conditioned to EMC at the various relative humidity exposures from at or near

effects, EMC values reached from a ovendry condition (adsorption).

higher moisture condition (desorption) 2 From Nordenson 1965
are considerably greater than
adsorption EMC values. For example, 3 From McNatt 1969a, 1973, 1974, and Nordenson 1965.
figure 5 (McNatt 1969a) shows the
hysteresis effect for a medium-density 4 From Stamm 1964.
hardboard.
The time to reach equilibrium at a
given relative humidity (RH) depends
on the rate of diffusion of water vapor Linear Expansion Water Adsorption and
into the material and the amount of Thickness Swelling
initial-to-final RH change. Hardboard Linear expansion of hardboard and
and cellulosic fiberboard diffusion rates cellulosic fiberboard does not appear to The FPL has gathered very little
are controlled primarily by panel be influenced as much by panel density water adsorption and thickness swelling
density. As Heck (1937) showed, as by various other manufacturing and data on wood fiber products. Luxford
cellulosic fiberboard may reach raw material variables. Between 30 and (1955) reported less than 2 percent
equilibrium in a week or so when 90 percent RH, the ranges of linear increase in weight after 2 hours soaking
moved from a 30 percent RH expansion reported are: 0.20-0.47 for 14 different cellulosic fiberboard
environment to a 90 percent RH percent for cellulosic fiberboard sheathing products treated with asphalt
environment. In contrast, hardboard (Luxford 1955, McNatt 1982, McNatt to retard moisture pickup. He also
may take a month or more to reach and Lewis 1966 and 1967), 0.15-0.52 reported an 8 percent increase for
EMC (McNatt 1982). percent for hardboard (McNatt 1969a, 6 hours soaking and 35 percent
1982; Werren and McNatt 1975), and increase for 48 hours soaking. McNatt
0.35-0.62 percent for MDF (Laundrie (1969a) reported that medium-density
and McNatt 1975, Superfesky and hardboard soaked for 2 hours increased
Lewis 1974). 2.8 percent in weight and 1.2 percent in
McNatt (1 973) has found that thickness. Soaked for 24 hours, it
buckling (Y) of 16-inch-long hardboard increased about 8 percent in weight
siding strips, restrained at the ends to and about 6 percent in thickness.
restrict linear expansion, can be related Superfesky and Lewis (1974), using
to unrestrained linear expansion (L), three commercial MDF products soaked
specific gravity (G), and board for 24 hours, found increases in weight
thickness (t). The equation developed varying from 8.8 to 12.5 percent and in
for 35 different hardboards was: thickness from 2.8 to 4.2 percent.

(1)

16
 It should be pointed out here that
as wet-process cellulosic fiberboard and
hardboard mills attempt to reduce
effluent pollution, water adsorption and
dimensional stability are adversely
affected. Effluent discharge limitations
are met by recycling process water
which increases the concentration of
dissolved solids and fines in the
product. Therefore, hardboard and
cellulosic fiberboard values quoted
above may not be relevant for current
production.

Thermal Conductivity
Lewis (1967) conducted a major
thermal conductivity study of wood-base
panel products. Using the ASTM
Standard C 177 guarded hotplate
apparatus, he evaluated fiber-based
panels ranging from 1.6 to 62.3 Ib/ft3
and developed the design curve shown
in figure 6. The curve is based on a
mean temperature of 75 °F. The values
should be increased or decreased
0.00053 for each degree increase or
decrease in mean temperature (see
fig. 6 for units).

Dielectric Properties
James (1 975) reported values for two
dielectric properties of 1/4-inch
hardboard: Dielectric constant-ability
of a material to absorb and store
energy, and loss tangent-rateof
energy loss in the material. He found
that dielectric constant and, with a few
exceptions, loss tangent perpendicular
to the panel face increased as moisture
content and temperature increased, and
decreased as the frequency of the
electric field increased. At frequencies
of 1 to 50 kHz, hardboard values were
very close to solid Douglas-fir and oak
across the grain. At lower frequencies,
values diverged.

17
 Fire Performance
Several studies over the past
40 years have investigated the fire
performance of cellulosic fiberboard and
hardboard and the effects of fire-
retardant treatments. Van Kleeck and
Martin (1950) compared small vertical,
inclined, and horizontal panel tests to
evaluate the flamespread resistance of
interior finish cellulosic fiberboard. They
found reasonably good correlation
between the methods, but did state that
it would be difficult to predict
performance in one of the tests from
performance in either of the other two
tests. Bruce (1953) reported that
interior-grade cellulosic fiberboard
performed about the same as
Douglas-fir plywood as wall and ceiling
covering in a series of experimental
dwelling-room fires. He concluded from
these tests that room furnishings were
a bigger factor in room fires than wall
and ceiling covering. Fire flashover
occurred about the same time whether
the wall and ceiling coverings were
cellulosic fiberboard, plywood, or
gypsum board.
Schaffer and Eichner (1965) reported
the same flashover time for a partially
ventilated corridor whether the walls
were lined with plaster, with wood
wainscoting, prefinished hardboard
paneling, or red oak lumber.
Brenden and Schaffer (1 980)
proposed a simple test to compare
smoldering tendency of cellulosic
fiberboard. Smoldering of cellulosic
fiberboard used as sound insulation in
walls (sound-deadening board) can
result from careless use of soldering
torches when installing plumbing. Van
Kleeck and Sandberg (1949) had earlier
found boric acid to be superior to
monoammonium phosphate in retarding
smoldering.
Myers and Holmes (1975, 1977)
showed that dry-formed hardboard
flamespread could be reduced
significantly by adding fire-retardant
chemicals during manufacture.
Figure 6.–Relationship between thermal conductivity and specific gravity Flamespread index of untreated panels
for wood-base fiber materials and suggested design curve. Lewis 1967. averaged about 180. Panels made from
(M 132 875) treated fiber averaged about 50 to 60
which meets the 75-or-under
flamespread criterion for Class B
material.

18
 Mechanical Fastener
Performance

Acoustical Absorption Screwholding Lewis (1959a) found a similar

and Sound Transmission relationship for a pilot-plant
Resistance to direct screw withdrawal manufactured cellulosic fiberboard
Depending upon board type and is relevant only for those fiberbase sheathing with sulfite liquor as a binder
method of application, cellulosic panel products used in furniture and and water resistance substance. The
fiberboards and hardboards can be cabinet making. This applies almost regression equation for 90 specimens
effective in the two major areas of noise exclusively to MDF about 3/8 inch thick is:
control in buildings; isolation from or greater. Superfesky (1974) measured LNR/T = 1221G - 220 (3)
external sound and absorption of maximum direct screw withdrawal
internal sound. FPL scientists have resistance on three commercial MDF (r2 = .84)
developed some information in both products using 1-inch-long, No. 10,
Type A and Type AB tapping (sheet Equations (2) and (3) are valid only
areas. Godshall and Davis (1969) used
metal) screws. In all cases the Type A within the range of specific gravity
the ASTM C 384 impedance tube
screw gave withdrawal resistance evaluated; they indicate negative results
method (ASTM 1977) to compare
values at least 10 percent greater than for specific gravity slightly below 0.2.
sound absorption characteristics of
the Type AB screw. As expected, both Lewis (1 963) also reported on a
wood-base materials including wood-
face and edge withdrawal resistance series of lateral nail resistance tests
fiber matting, cellulosic fiberboard
increased as panel density increased conducted to determine the effect of
ceiling tile, and hardboard. Perforated
(fig. 7). Laundrie and McNatt (1975) rate of loading on test results for
hardboard, backed with a 1 -inch fiber
measured maximum screw withdrawal 25/32-inch-thick regular-density
mat, appeared to perform best; even
resistance of No. 10, Type A screws cellulosic fiberboard sheathing.
better than porous acoustical ceiling
from 3/4-inch-thick MDF panels made Six-penny common nails were driven
tile.
from urban wood waste (dismantled 1/2 inch from the edge. Maximum loads
Jones (1975a, 1975b; 1978)
wood railroad cars, used pallets, dead for specimens loaded at 2.00 inches
demonstrated that both hardboard and
elm trees, and wastepaper). Face per minute were only about 4.5 percent
sound-deadening cellulosic fiberboard
withdrawal resistances ranged from 198 greater than for specimens loaded at
can be used to reduce sound
to 432 pounds and edge withdrawal 0.25 inch per minute. The slower speed
transmission through walls. At the same
resistances ranged from 161 to yielded more uniform results.
time, he pointed out that construction
practices can be at least as important 355 pounds. At equivalent densities,
as construction materials in reducing values were below those for Wall Racking Strength
sound transmission. commercial MDF panels.
Several researchers have used
Lateral Nail Resistance maximum lateral nail resistance to
predict racking strength of wood-frame
Probably the most important property walls sheathed with wood-base
of cellulosic fiberboard sheathing is sheathing panels. With a limited amount
resistance to lateral movement of a nail of data, Luxford (1957a) related
toward the panel edge (fig. 8) since it is maximum lateral nail resistance (LNR),
directly related to wall racking in pounds, of cellulosic fiberboard
resistance. sheathing and racking strength (RK) of
Lewis (1962b) measured the 8- by 8-foot wall sections:
maximum lateral nail resistance of 47 RK = 29LNR + 2,150 (4)
different cellulosic fiberboard sheathing
products: 1/2- and 25/32-inch-thick (r2 = not reported)
regular-density (0.26-0.35 specific This appears to be quite different from
gravity (sp. gr.)), 1/2-inch-thick the relationship found by Neisel and
intermediate-density (0.30-0.41 sp. gr.), Guerrera (1956):
and 1/2-inch-thick nail-base
(0.36-0.43 sp. gr.). Eleven-gage RK = 57.3LNR - 313 (5)
galvanized roofing nails and a 3/4-inch
(r2 = 0.90)
edge distance were used. Lewis
reported that lateral nail resistance per However, when Neisel (1958) plotted
inch of panel thickness (LNR/T) varied the two sets of data on the same graph
directly with panel specific gravity (G). (fig. 9), he found a common linear
Least squares regression of all 282 relationship:
specimens gave the relationship:
RK = 46.4LNR + 736 (6)
LNR/T = 1263G - 198 (2)
(r2 = 0.83)
(r2 = 0.80)

19
Figure 7.–Face and edge screw withdrawal loads of type A and AB tapping screws for different
MDF densities. Superfesky 1973. (ML85 5062)

Results from these earlier studies on 11-gage galvanized roofing nails In 1937 Heck conducted wall racking
racking strength were valid for the instead of 8d common nails and a tests on wall sections sheathed with
specific wall dimensions, materials, and 314-inch edge distance in the lateral nail 25132-inch cellulosic fiberboard to
nailing patterns used: they indicate tests instead of 1/2 inch. They felt the determine strength and rigidity and to
widely different values for the racking 314-inch edge distance best evaluate effects of nail spacing, high
strength of the wall frame itself (2,150, represented displacement of critical humidity exposure, and window and
-313, and 736 Ib). perimeter nails in a racking test. In door openings. Industry-recommended
Tuomi and Gromala (1977) presented actual practice, half the perimeter nails nailing called for 8d nails at 3-inch
an equation relating maximum lateral move inward relative to the panel edge, intervals along the perimeter framing
nail resistance of sheathing and wall so edge distance is critical only for the and 6-inch intervals along the
racking strength which included factors other half of the perimeter nails. intermediate studs. Test results showed
for the number and size of sheathing Variation of edge distances probably that:
panels used and nail spacings. They accounts for most of the difference
When window and door openings
found the racking strength of the wall between the two lines in figure 9. Tuomi
were included, wall strength and
frame itself to be about 450 pounds. and Gromala (1977) determined the
stiffness decreased more than
Tuomi and McCutcheon (1 978) used relationship between edge distance and
50 percent.
this equation to predict racking strength maximum lateral nail resistance for four
When double the recommended
of full-size (8- by 8-ft) wall sections and types of cellulosic fiberboard sheathing
number of nails were used, strength
more economical 2- by 2-foot sections. (fig. 10). Luxford (1955) found that
and stiffness increased about 50
The study confirmed that the equation resistance for 3/4-inch edge distance
percent for walls without openings
is independent of panel size. This averaged about 75 percent greater than
and 20 to 40 percent for walls with
equation is also plotted in figure 9 for for 318-inch edge distance.
openings.
the same wall section construction used
by Luxford and by Neisel and Guerrera,
except that Tuomi and Gromala used

20
 Figure 9.-Relationship between lateral nail resistance of fiberboard
sheathing and racking resistance of walls sheathed with fiberboard.
(ML85 5063). The equation for line A is from Neisel and Guerrera (1956),
with data points from Luxford (1957a) (Dry Wet ) and Neisel and
Guerrera (1956) (Dry Wet . Equation and data points (Dry O ) for
line B are from Tuomi and Gromala (1977).

Figure 8–Test setup for

measuring lateral nail resistance
of fiberboard according to ASTM
Standard D 1037. (M766 00)

Tests showed that strength and

stiffness of walls decreased about
15 percent during a month at 40 °F
and 94 percent RH; they decreased
about 20 percent during a 24-hour
water spraying.
Soltis and others (1983) included a
table of comparative racking strength of
8- by 8-foot wood-frame walls with
plywood, flakeboard, or cellulosic
fiberboard sheathing. It is interesting
that the wall section with 1/2-inch
nailbase cellulosic fiberboard sheathing
carried the greatest load (6,380 Ib). Nail
spacings were 3 inches, perimeter, and
6 inches, interior, for the cellulosic
fiberboard and 6 inches/12 inches for
the flakeboard and plywood, according
to industry recommendations. Strength
and stiffness of flakeboard and plywood
walls could be increased significantly by Figure 10.–Lateral nail resistance at various edge distances for four
increasing the number of nails. types of cellulosic fiberboard. Tuomi and Gromala 1977. (M144 300)

21
 Gounaris (1964) tested wall panels Load-bearing walls must not only called "elastic bearing constant" and is
sheathed with 1/4-inch tempered meet code requirements for maximum useful in evaluating the stiffness of
hardboard to determine resistance to load, but also maximum allowable nailed joints between framing and
earthquake-type forces. Maximum deflection at given load increments. sheathing in walls, roofs, and floors.
racking strength for 8- by 8-foot wall Wilkinson (1972, 1974) developed McCutcheon (1 985) developed the
sections ranged from 9,100 pounds for theoretical methods for predicting theory to define racking deformation of
panels with hardboard nailed to one load-deformation characteristics of a wood stud walls as a function of the
side to more than 28,000 pounds for a nailed lap joint of one solid wood lateral nonlinear load-slip behavior of
wall section with hardboard nail-glued member (framing) and one sheathing the nails.
to both sides. Cyclic-load racking material member, including cellulosic
indicated that walls sheathed on both fiberboard and hardboard siding. The
sides with hardboard could well resist predicted slope of the load-slip curve
severe earthquake loads. (fig. 11) is based on a material property

Figure 11.–Theoretical versus experimental slopes of the load-slip curve for joints with one
member of Douglas-fir lumber and one member of panel material. Wilkinson 1972. (M141 657)

22
Lateral Staple Resistance
Since staples are being used
increasingly in place of nails to attach
sheathing to wood framing, information
on resistance to lateral movement of
staples in various sheathing materials is
needed. Lewis (1962a) developed a
test for measuring lateral staple
resistance of cellulosic fiberboard
sheathing (fig. 12). With nail-base
cellulosic sheathing and 16-gage,
1-1/2-inch-long staples, maximum loads
were comparable to those of 11 -gage
roofing nails tested by the standard
ASTM procedure (fig. 8). Staple tests
with 25/32-inch regular-density
cellulosic fiberboard sheathing gave
somewhat lower values than nail tests
because the staple crown was pulled
into the face of the panel. This is, in
fact, the type of failure expected in
racking tests of wall panels sheathed
with stapled-on regular-desity
cellulosic fiberboard.
Chow and others (1984) reported that
the maximum lateral resistance of a
16-gage staple in a hardboard siding
average about 75 percent of the
maximum lateral resistance of a 6d nail.

Figure 12.–Test setup for measuring lateral staple

resistance of fiberboards. Lewis 1962a. (M121 368)

23
Hardboard Glue-Bond Hardboard Machining Basic Strength and
Strength Properties Elastic Properties

Hardboard and other wood-base Davis (1 957) conducted a series of Except for one extensive study on
panels are sometimes bonded together nine different tests to compare hardboard in the 1960’s (McNatt and
or to other materials, when machining properties of various Lewis 1963-70), very little work has
manufacturing furniture and casegoods. hardboards. He concluded that the been done on the basic strength and
Bond strength is affected by a number main problem in machining hardboard elastic properties of commercial
of factors. For example, using heat to was relatively rapid dulling of cutting hardboards and fiberboards. Probably
accelerate setting of water-base glues tools. Carbide-tipped tools could largely most of the property values from that
creates steep moisture gradients in the solve this problem. Common defects study are not relevant for current
material adjacent to the glue line at the were fuzzing and chipping. Hardboard production because stricter water
time the glue sets. As the moisture was less subject to some machining treatment requirements have
dissipates, internal stresses are set up problems than lumber because it has necessitated manufacturing changes.
which can actually cause bond failure no grain direction. The same is true for Luxford’s (1 955)
without added outside forces (Lewis data on bending strength of 14
1968b). Anderson (1969) demonstrated commercial cellulosic fiberboard
that hardboard type, moisture content, sheathing products and the effects of
type of glue, and failure location interact water soaking.
to affect glue-line shear strength. For Lewis (1959b) evaluated the
example, glue type affected bond structural properties of 1-1/2-, 2-, and
strength more in untempered than in 3-inch laminated cellulosic fiberboard
tempered hardboard. Shear strength roof deck panels from 13
was generally greater when the failure manufacturers. Bending loads at failure
occurred in the body of the board rather were 7 to 11 times design loads and
than at, or adjacent to, the glue line. In calculated deflections at design loads
turn, glue type influenced failure were less than span/300. All panels
location. retained at least 55 percent of original
bending strength after accelerated
aging. Lewis also measured resistance
to impact and concentrated load and
creep under continuous load. This work
was the basis for standard cellulosic
fiberboard roof deck tests (ASTM 1983).
More recently Superfesky and Lewis
(1 974) determined the basic properties
of three commercial MDF products
(called “medium-density hardboard” in
their report). Some average property
values are:
MOR = 4,700-5,000 Ib/in.2
MOE = 500,000-520,000 Ib/in.2
Tension parallel strength =
2,500-3,000 Ib/in.2
Compression parallel strength =
3,000-3,600 Ib/in.2
Internal bond strength = 130-190 Ib/in2
Hardness = 1,500-2,300 Ib
The above property values are probably
still valid for current production.

24
 Laundrie and McNatt (1 975) reported Lewis (1968c) developed a hardness McNatt (1969b) developed a rail
properties of MDF made from urban modulus test as an alternative to the shear test (fig. 13) suitable for
wood waste. Performance levels of a ASTM standard Janka ball hardness determining edgewise shear strength
few specific board types bettered those test for wood and wood-base materials. (fig. 14) of hardboard and other wood-
of commercial MDF panels, but for the Hardness modulus is the ratio of load to base panels. The test was incorporated
most part levels were lower. depth of penetration using the same into ASTM D 1037 and was used to
0.444-inch-diameter steel ball as in the measure shear strength of hardboards
Lewis (1 971) evaluated the bending standard test: Equivalent Janka ball used in built-up I-beams discussed later
properties and hardness of 13 hardness is estimated by dividing in this report.
commercial hardboard siding products hardness modulus by 5.4. Hardness
and two other fiber-based siding modulus, particularly suited to thin
materials. Hardboard sp. gr. ranged panels, is now included in ASTM
from 0.60 to 0.88, MOE from 189,000 Standard D 1037 (ASTM 1978b).
to 594,000 Ib/in2, MOR from 1,630 to
5,030 Ib/in2, and hardness from 490 to
2,080 pounds. Measurement of the two
other fiber-based siding materials (one
of repulped newsprint, the other of
laminated paperboard) gave the
following values: sp. gr., 0.40 and 0.52;
MOE, 88,000 and 370,000 Ib/in. 2 ; MOR,
670 and 1,600 Ib/in.2; and hardness,
185 and 300 pounds.

Figure 13.–Rail shear test setup

for measuring edgewise shear
strength of hardboard. ASTM
Standard D 1037. (M125 798)

Figure 14.–Three basic shearing directions for hardboard (character of

failure not necessarily as shown). McNatt 1972. (M139 209)

25
 Effects of Loading
Conditions and Specimen
Dimensions on
Mechanical Properties

Hardboards are sometimes subjected A number of studies have Short column: Specimen no longer
to what is called “die-cutting’’ shear investigated the effects of testing speed than 4 times panel thickness, for
(fig. 14) when cutting to size or when on measured strength of hardboards strength only.
producing cut-outs in radio and TV and cellulosic fiberboards (Lewis 1953, Lateral support: Single thickness of
backs, filigree panels, and perforated 1955; McNatt 1970; Youngquist and panels thin enough to buckle if loaded
panels (pegboard). McNatt (1972) Munthe 1948). In three of these only as unsupported column, for strength
compared two test methods for bending strength was measured. In a and stiffness.
measuring die-cutting shear strength of fourth (McNatt 1970), tension, Laminated: Several thicknesses
hardboard; the Johnson double-shear compression, and shear strength were laminated together to eliminate
tool and the Standard D 732 (ASTM also measured. In all cases, results buckling, for strength and stiffness.
1946) for plastics. Shear strengths, agreed with previously published
These three options are now included
which were about the same for both information on solid wood. That is,
in ASTM D 1037.
tests, ranged from 2,300 to 4,500 Ib/in.2 strength decreased 6 to 10 percent for
depending on panel density and each tenfold increase in time to In addition to the rate-of-loading tests
thickness. The ASTM D 732 method, maximum load. The bending specimen McNatt (1 970) also conducted stress-
which cut a round plug, was judged size and rate of loading requirements rupture tests on 1/4-inch-thick
better for hardboard because it currently in ASTM D 1037 are based on hardboard in tension parallel to surface.
produces a sharper failure and the recommendations of Youngquist He measured time to failure for
averages any board directional and Munthe. specimens at constant loads of 90, 80,
properties. Lewis (1948) investigated the effect 70, 60, and 50 percent of static
Fatigue (repeated loading) testing of of four different specimen types (fig. 15) strength. The trends of these stress-
wood-base products is primarily a on the tension parallel-to-surface rupture data and the rate-of-loading
research tool to help predict long-term strength of cellulosic fiberboard data were used to calculate a
loading behavior. McNatt (1970) found sheathing. As a result of this study, hyperbolic curve representing the
that fatigue strengths of 1/4-inch-thick type D in figure 15 was selected as the relationship between stress level (S, in
tempered hardboard for 10 million standard for ASTM D 1037. pct) and time to failure (T, in sec):
cycles of stress in tension and shear Clouser (1 962) investigated various
were about 45 percent of static specimen configurations for measuring (7)
strength, about the same as solid wood compression parallel-to-surface
and particleboard. properties of wood-base panels
These data together with other such
including hardboard and cellulosic
information from England and Sweden
fiberboard. Not all products could be
were used to derive allowable design
evaluated by a single test. He
values for tempered hardboard now a
suggested three options for a wide
part of the British Standard Code of
range of densities and thicknesses.
Practice on structural use of wood
products.

26
Figure 15.–Details of tension parallel-to-surface specimens for comparative tests on cellulosic fiberboard. Lewis 1948.
(ZM777 13F)
Effect of Moisture on
Physical and Mechanical
Properties

McNatt (1974) investigated effects of lnterlaminar shear modulus between McNatt (1982) found that a hardboard
changes in equilibrium moisture content ovendry and 50 percent RH averaged siding subjected to 12 cycles of
(EMC) on the strength and stiffness of 125 percent. It averaged only 1 month at 30 percent RH plus 1 month
six different 1/4-inch-thick tempered 70 percent at 80 percent RH and at 90 percent RH retained 95 percent of
hardboards (figs. 16 and 17). The range 60 percent at 90 percent RH. its original bending strength and
of average properties, except for The lines for bending strength and stiffness. A cellulosic fiberboard
interlaminar shear modulus, are shown stiffness in figures 16 and 17 agree with sheathing subjected to the same
below as a percent of control values at work done earlier by Nordenson (1 965) exposure retained 85 percent of its
65 percent RH. on hardboard siding. That is, bending original bending properties. The results
strength and stiffness between ovendry were the same when the cyclic
100 to 120 percent between ovendry exposure was shortened to 12
and 50 percent RH were no greater
and 50 percent RH.
than the control values at 65 percent repetitions of 1 week at 30 percent RH
80 to almost 100 percent at 80
RH. On the other hand, Nordenson plus 1 week at 90 percent RH.
percent RH.
found that cellulosic fiberboard
70 to 90 percent at 90 percent RH.
sheathing bending properties in the
same humidity range were about
20 percent greater than control values.

Figure 16.–Average elastic moduli of six 1/4-inch-thick tempered hardboards ovendried and
conditioned to equilibrium moisture content at five relative humidities. McNatt 1974. (M141 014)

28
Figure 17.–Average strength of six 1/4-inch-thick tempered hardboards ovendried and conditioned
to equilibrium moisture content at five relative humidities. McNatt 1974. (M141 01 1)

McNatt and Lewis (1 966, 1967)

related sag deflection of 2- by 4-foot
cellulosic fiberboard lay-in ceiling
panels at high humidity to sag
deflection of 4- by 24-inch strips cut
from the panels. For small deflections,
sag of the panels and strips were about
equal; but as deflections increased, sag
of the panels became proportionately
smaller compared to that of the strips.
Attempts to relate sag to panel
properties were unsuccessful because
of interactions between linear
expansion, panel stiffness, and panel
weight. This panel sag test is now
included in ASTM C 367 as a standard
test method.

29
Hardboard and Hardboard and
Fiberboard Durability Fiberboard Performance
in Use

The ASTM D 1037 6-cycle In addition to the earlier discussion of Luxford (1936) determined bending
accelerated aging test was used in cellulosic fiberboard and hardboard strength of panels with wood framework
several studies to evaluate the racking and acoustical performance in and either plywood or hardboard faces.
suitability of cellulosic fiberboard and walls, a number of other studies have Vertical “studs” were spaced 12 inches
hardboard for extreme exposure examined the structural performance of on center. In addition, some panels had
conditions such as exterior siding and hardboard. horizontal stiffeners 12 inches on
roof decking. center. Without stiffeners, hardboard-
Lewis (1968a) used the 6-cycle test Structural Sandwich faced panels were about 20 percent
to gage the possible deterioration of 15 Panels stronger than plywood-faced panels; but
different hardboard siding products. plywood-faced panels were about
Most of them were judged suitable for In 1947 FPL built an experimental 12 percent stiffer. Stiffeners did not
exterior exposure. Several were felt to unit using structural sandwich panels affect properties of hardboard-faced
be unsuitable due primarily to excessive (Palms and Sherwood 1979). All the panels, but increased plywood strength
thickness swelling. Myers (1 979) tested original panels had paper honeycomb and stiffness. This was attributed to the
dry-formed phenolic-bonded hardboards cores and plywood or aluminum nearly equal hardboard strength and
made from tropical hardboards after the facings. After a year three replacement stiffness along and across the panel
ASTM 6-cycle exposure. He concluded panels were installed, one with 1/4-inch length. The 1/4-inch-thick plywood was
that they were sufficiently durable for hardboard facings and two with considerably stronger and stiffer in the
exterior use. Fahey (1976) reported that 1/8-inch-thick hardboard facings. In length direction than in the width
phenol-resorcinol-bonded hardboards 1955 two of the aluminum-faced panels direction.
could be made using high-frequency were replaced with ones faced on one
pressing based on bending tests after side with 1/8-inch-thick hardboard and Roof Support Systems
the 6-cycle exposure. River and others on the other side with porcelanized
(1981) compared the ASTM 6-cycle test steel. Replacement hardboard-faced Four of the W-trusses in an
with two other exposures as a measure panels were also installed in 1961 and experimental pole building at FPL
of hardboard durability: Up to 80 boil- 1962. Ten hardboard-faced panels were (Doyle 1969) were made with 1/4-inch-
dry cycles, and up to 40 vacuum- tested in bending after up to 30 years thick tempered hardboard gusset
pressure-soak cycles. Relationships exposure. Stiffness showed little plates. Stiffness of these was
between the three tests were not change while strength reduction varied essentially the same as that of trusses
consistent for the four hardboards. considerably but was generally in the made with 1/2-inch-thick plywood
Strength retained after the 6-cycle test range of 25 percent. gusset plates.
compared to as few as 2 cycles of the In 1968, FPL began a series of
other two tests, or to as many as studies on hardboard as the shear web
35 cycles. Samples of these four Stressed-Skin Panels
in built-up wood I-beams (McNatt 1980;
hardboards are being exposed to McNatt and Superfesky 1983; Ramaker
outdoor weathering, but have not yet A series of prefabricated housing wall
panel tests (Luxford 1957b) indicated and Davister 1972; Superfesky and
been evaluated. Ramaker 1976, 1978). These studies
Feist (1982) found hardboard siding that walls made with 2- by 3-inch
framing, gypsum interior facing, and showed that structural performance of
to have the best overall paint and stain such beams could be predicted from
finish performance when compared with hardboard sheathing-siding met federal
housing performance standards in mechanical properties of the beam
solid southern pine boards, Douglas-fir components and that the beams could
plywood, and aspen waferboard after effect at that time. In 1962, two of the
original plywood-faced stressed-skin perform adequately under long-term
52 months of outdoor weathering. interior and protected exterior
Laundrie et al. (1979) reported that wall panels were removed from an
experimental building constructed in environments.
the addition of as little as 0.2 lb/ft 3 of
ammoniacal copper arsenate prevents 1937. One of the replacement panels
essentially all decay fungi and termite had hardboard faces; the other had Hardboard in Shipping
attack during the first year of ground- plywood faces. Heyer (1 964) reported Pallets
contact exposure in a severe tropical that the hardboard- and plywood-faced
climate. panels were equal in bending stiffness. Kurtenacker (1 975) and Stern
(1979a, 1979b, 1980) conducted a
series of studies to develop an effective
hardboard pallet design. Results
indicated that pallets with hardboard
decks (fig. 18) would be especially
advantageous in mechanized
warehouse operations because of their
low diagonal distortion tendency.
Prolonged outdoor exposure is not
recommended because areas damaged
during forklift handling exhibited
increased deterioration.

30
Figure 18.–Hardboard-lumber pallet designs. (A) lumber control pallet with spaced top deckboards and (B)
experimental pallet with hardboard top deck. Stern 1980. (M146 547)
Summary

For more than 50 years the U.S. Fewer studies were conducted on Results from these studies suggest
Forest Products Laboratory has mat forming, hot pressing, and post- additional research possibilities. For
conducted fiberboard and hardboard treatment. Aligning fibers and adding example, the hardboard I-beam studies
research in three broad areas: fiber glass to the fiber mats were indicated that performance criteria such
processing, properties, and investigated as means of increasing as long-term strength, resistance to
performance. During the 1930’s and strength and stability. Most of the work creep, and response to humidity
1940’s only a few studies were on hot pressing involved different variations can be affected by
completed on raw material evaluations temperatures and pressing times. Post- processing variables (wood species,
and testing. Activity in the 1950’s and treatment investigations were primarily fiber refining, mat-forming, and press
1960’s intensified on raw material and concerned with the addition of oils or conditions). As more of the processing
board properly evaluations. During the other chemicals, and/or heat-treatment, variables are studied and understood, it
1970’s and early 1980’s the emphasis of the hardboard. may be possible to manipulate the
shifted toward processing and structural Early work in properties and processing operation to attain a desired
applications. Readers must be aware performance emphasized test method performance, and utilize more fiberbase
that this publication only covers development, mechanical fastener panel products structurally.
research completed at FPL. performance of cellulosic fiberboards as
Most of the processing research was related to wall racking strength, use of
carried out in the areas of fiber hardboard as facings on stressed-skin
resources, fiber preparation, fiber and sandwich panels, and fire
treatments, and additives. Many performance of these fiber-based
species of domestic and foreign panels. Later studies concentrated on
hardwoods and softwoods were basic properties of hardboard and how
investigated. Other sources of fiber they were affected by loading and
were also investigated, including environmental conditions and structural
residues from forests and forest use of hardboard as webs in I-beams.
products industries, clean wastepaper,
fiber from municipal wastes, and fiber
from agricultural residues. Fiber
preparation investigated various
aspects of atmospheric and pressurized
refining, plus some chemical cooks.
Closely aligned with fiber preparation
were studies on fiber yield and
characterization. Many items are added
to the fibers prior to or during the
forming operation, including paraffin
wax, other sizing chemicals, and resins.
Other fiber additives were investigated
with the intention of making hardboard
stronger and more stable, fire-retardant,
or resistant to decay. Most of the resin
additives involved different types of
phenolic resins, but there was work
done on some thermoplastics and
resins made from renewable resources.
Different resin application points were
investigated.

32
References

33
34
35
36
37
Availability of Studies

On October 1, 1982, the Department of Agriculture began Addresses of Sources

a department-wide cost reduction and sales recovery
program for publications. This program aims to reduce the
FPRS
Federal Government's printing and distribution costs by
Mary Gordon, Data Base Manager
(1) limiting the number of free copies available from the
Forest Products Research Society
Government and (2) referring inquiries to established sales
2801 Marshall Court
outlets. Most of the studies cited in this report are not
Madison, WI 53705
available from the Forest Products Laboratory. They are,
(608) 231 -1 361
however, available from a variety of other sources. The
sources and their abbreviations are as follows:
GPO
FPL Forest Products Laboratory Superintendent of Documents
FPRS Forest Products Research Society Government Printing Off ice
GPO Government Printing Office 710 North Capitol Street
Washington, DC 20402
IPC Institute of Paper Chemistry (202) 275-2091
NTlS National Technical Information Service
U. Wis. University of Wisconsin IPC
Information Services
Sources of Free Information Institute of Paper Chemistry
Box 1039
Appleton, WI 54912
Libraries
(414) 734-9251
Forest Products Laboratory series reports are available
from many Federal Depository Libraries and from other NTlS
university and technical libraries around the world. Contact NTlS National Technical Information Service
your local librarian for further information. Journal articles, U.S. Department of Commerce
commercially published material, and material published by 5285 Port Royal Road
other government agencies may also be available from Springfield, VA 22161
libraries. (703) 487-4650
(703) 487-4700 RUSH ORDERS
Sources which Charge a Fee U. Wis.
Information Services Division
FPRS Kurt F. Wendt Library
The Forest Products Research Society has a reprint College of Engineering
service which can provide reprints of symposium University of Wisconsin-Madison
proceedings published by the Society, reprints of articles 215 North Randall Avenue
from the Forest Products Journal, and reprints of many
Madison, WI 53706
other journals (published since 1974). (608) 262-591 3
(608) 262-591 7
GPO
The Government Printing Office operates several
bookstores that stock some of the Government publications
mentioned in this report.

IPC
The Institute of Paper Chemistry has a reprint service
which can provide reprints of many journal articles
mentioned in this report.

NTlS
All Forest Products Laboratory Series reports published
since 1963 are available in hard copy and microfiche from
The National Technical Information Service.

U. Wis.
The University of Wisconsin has a reprint service which
can provide reprints of many journal articles mentioned in
this report.

3.0-10/85

38 U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE:1985/641-044/20010

Availability of Specific Journals
Reprints of articles from the journals mentioned in this
report are available for a fee from the following specific
reprint services:
Forest Products Journal (FPRS, U.Wis.)
Journal of Coatings Technology (Libraries)
Journal of the Engineering (IPC, U.Wis.)
Mechanics Division, American Society of Civil
Engineers (now Journal of Engineering Mechanics)
Journal of the Structural (IPC, U.Wis.)
Division, American Society of Civil Engineers
(now Journal of Structural Engineering)
Paper Trade Journal (IPC)
Southern Pulp and Paper (FPRS, IPC) Manufacturer
Tappi (now Tappi Journal) (FPRS, IPC, U.Wis.)
Wood and Wood Products (FPRS)

Items Available From Forest Products

Laboratory
A few items are available from the Forest Products
Laboratory free of charge. The address is as follows

FPL
U.S. Department of Agriculture
Forest Service
Forest Products Laboratory
One Gifford Pinchot Drive
Madison, WI 53705
(608) 264-5600

Other Sources of Information

In addition, items published by universities, state
experiment stations, other Federal offices, or commercial
publishers may be available from the publisher. Agriculture
Handbook 72, the Wood Handbook, is available through the
Government Printing Office (GPO).
Other commercial and not-for-profit services offer reprints.
Use of trade, firm, or corporation names in this publication is
for the information and convenience of the reader. Such use
does not constitute an official endorsement or approval by
the U.S. Department of Agriculture of any product or service
to the exclusion of others that may be suitable.

Disclaimer
The use of trade and company names is for the benefit of
the reader; such use does not constitute an official endorse-
ment or approval of any service or product by the
U.S. Department of Agriculture to the exclusion of others that
may be suitable.

39
The Forest Products Early research at the Unanswered questions remain
Laboratory (USDA Forest Laboratory helped establish and new ones will arise
Service) has served as the U.S. industries that produce because of changes in the
national center for wood pulp and paper, lumber, timber resource and
utilization research since structural beams, plywood, increased use of wood
1910. The Laboratory, on the particleboard and wood products. As we approach the
University of Wisconsin- furniture, and other wood 21st Century, scientists at the
Madison campus, has products. Studies now in Forest Products Laboratory
achieved worldwide progress provide a basis for will continue to meet the
recognition for its more effective management challenge posed by these
contribution to the knowledge and use of our timber questions.
and better use of wood. resource by answering critical
questions on its basic
characteristics and on its
conversion for use in a variety
of consumer applications.