buildings

Article
Coconut Fibre and Sawdust as Green Building Materials:
A Laboratory Assessment on Physical and Mechanical
Properties of Particleboards
Dg Normaswanna binti Tawasil 1, * , Eeydzah Aminudin 1 , Nor Hasanah Abdul Shukor Lim 1 ,
Nik Mohd Zaini Nik Soh 2 , Pau Chung Leng 3 , Gabriel Hoh Teck Ling 3 and Mohd Hamdan Ahmad 3

1 Faculty of Engineering, School of Civil Engineering, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia,

Skudai 81300, Johor, Malaysia; [email protected] (E.A.); [email protected] (N.H.A.S.L.)
2 Department of Civil Engineering & Technology, Faculty of Civil & Environmental Engineering,
Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia, Parit Raja 86400, Johor, Malaysia; [email protected]
3 Faculty of Built Environment & Surveying, University Teknologi Malaysia, Skudai 81300, Johor, Malaysia;
[email protected] (P.C.L.); [email protected] (G.H.T.L.); [email protected] (M.H.A.)
* Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +60-14-6536930

Abstract: This paper evaluates, via a laboratory assessment, the physical properties (BS EN 323:1993,
BS EN 324) and mechanical performance (BS EN 310: 1993) of hybrid particleboards using agricul-



tural wastes, namely coconut fibre and sawdust. The process begins with the preparation of the


materials where they are sieved and retained with the 5-mm sieve and then oven-dried. The hybrid
Citation: Tawasil, D.N.b.; Aminudin, particleboard mixed with the addition of resin (urea formaldehyde) was sprayed and hot pressed.
E.; Abdul Shukor Lim, N.H.; Nik Soh,
The hot press temperature was set at 180 ◦ C, with the resin content of 8 wt.% and the design density of
N.M.Z.; Leng, P.C.; Ling, G.H.T.;
650 kg/m3 used in producing the particleboard. The percentage/ratio of the composition of sawdust
Ahmad, M.H. Coconut Fibre and
(SD) to coconut fibre (CF) varied ranging from 100SD:0CF to 70SD:30CF, 50SD:50CF, 30SD:70CF, and
Sawdust as Green Building Materials:
0SD:100CF. Meanwhile, as for the thickness of the boards, it was categorised into three groups which
A Laboratory Assessment on Physical
and Mechanical Properties of
are 16 mm, 20 mm, and 32 mm. The particleboards were conditioned to the room temperature for
Particleboards. Buildings 2021, 11, 256. seven days before being tested for physical properties and mechanical performances. The results
https://doi.org/10.3390/ show that the most optimum composition of sawdust to coconut fibre is 0% sawdust to 100% coconut
buildings11060256 fibre (0SD: 100CF) and the optimum thickness is 20 mm, where its density is 761.99 kg/m3 , swelling
thickness is 11.98%, and water absorption at 37.64%. With the modulus of elasticity of 1510 N/mm2 ,
Academic Editors: João the modulus of rupture of 17.8 N/mm2 , and the internal bonding of 1.08 N/mm2 , they satisfied the
Gomes Ferreira and Ana universal standard of Particleboard Type P3 of BS EN 312:2010.
Isabel Marques

Keywords: green building; waste materials; particleboard; coconut fibre; sawdust; physical proper-
Received: 26 April 2021
ties; mechanical performances
Accepted: 13 June 2021
Published: 16 June 2021

Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral

1. Introduction
with regard to jurisdictional claims in
published maps and institutional affil- According to Eurostat (2017), the pulp and paper and solid wood products industries
iations. accounted for around 4.4% (€277 billion) of total EU manufacturing production value and
5.4% (1.61 million) of total EU manufacturing employment in 2013. If forestry and logging,
as well as downstream wood-based industries, are included, the sector’s importance grows
significantly (furniture, energy, chemicals, and so on). Major structural changes are taking
Copyright: © 2021 by the authors.
place in the worldwide and European forest-based industries. The consumption and
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
production of wood-based products are shifting away from the traditionally dominant
This article is an open access article
forest sector regions of North America, Western Europe, and Japan, and toward the rapidly
distributed under the terms and rising big economies of China, Brazil, and India [1]. Wood-based composite materials can
conditions of the Creative Commons be composed of a variety of wood elements, such as fibres, particles, flakes, veneers, or
Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// laminates. These materials’ properties can be altered by mixing, rearranging, or stratifying
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ these elements. When raw material selection is combined with well-chosen processing
4.0/). variables, the end output can outperform nature’s best efforts.

Buildings 2021, 11, 256. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings11060256 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/buildings

Buildings 2021, 11, 256 2 of 24

At the moment, the term composite refers to any wood substance that has been adhe-
sively glued together. This includes a wide range of products, from fibreboard through
laminated beams and components [2]. Wood-based composites are employed in a va-
riety of structural and non-structural applications. Panels for both indoor and external
use, furniture components, and structural support structures are all part of the product
line. Understanding the mechanical qualities of these items is crucial for their proper
use. The performance of wood-based composites is characterised by a wide range of engi-
neering features. Mechanical characteristics are commonly utilised to assess wood-based
composites for structural and non-structural applications. The fundamental factors for
selecting materials or establishing design or product specifications are elastic and strength
properties [3].
Construction has been a significant human endeavor and one of the most critical fields
of industry for centuries. However, advances in the manufacturing of building materials,
as well as the construction industry in general, have a substantial effect on the environment
in terms of energy demand, usage of natural resources, and environmental pollution. In
reality, building materials use 24% of the extracted raw materials from the lithosphere,
a figure that will only rise in the coming years as the world and developing-country
populations grow. Several studies have shown that the construction industry’s present
state is unsustainable in the long run [4]. The method of valorizing wastes into more usable
products is an effective way of dealing with waste and, as a result, increasing competition
in bio-refineries that can produce a diverse variety of products using waste as feedstock [5].
Since, in addition to the decrease of raw materials used, the problem of waste caused by
industrial civilization is being addressed gradually, there is a greater emphasis on the use
of waste and by goods. Data from 2010 revealed that waste production in the European
Union was 2.5 billion tonnes, a 25% increase from 2006 (European Commission, 2015).
Reusing or valorizing these wastes may thus be a profitable way to solve this issue [4].
The use of spent coffee grounds (SCG) as an addition in brick manufacturing was
also investigated. Munoz et al. engineered SCG bricks and discovered bricks with a
compressive strength of more than 17% SCG waste above 10 N/mm2 , allowing them to
be used structurally. The thermal conductivity of these bricks was also reduced by 50%,
making them better insulators than standard bricks. A study on bricks partially composed
of SCG discovered that up to 10% SCG already had the best grade of mechanical standards,
and the addition of 20% reduced thermal conductivity by 70% [6]. Agricultural wastes,
such as oil palm, pineapple leaves, sugarcane bagasse powder, fly ash, kraft pulp, coconut
coir, rice husk, rice straw, kenaf, jute, hemp, corncob, and sawdust were mostly used
in the manufacture of cement-based composites. According to Abdullah (2017), despite
the material’s decreased compressive and flexural strength, the fibre content increases.
According to one report, the mechanical properties of clay brick made from oil palm fruit
and pineapple leaves meet the minimum requirements for traditional bricks, and the
addition of fibre decreases brick density. It was also discovered that a composite of recycled
municipal waste sludge, bagasse, and sludge had a high compressive strength value [7].
Against the above background, the objective of this study is to evaluate the physical
properties and mechanical performances of a wood-based panel, which is a particleboard
using agriculture wastes, namely coconut fibre and sawdust as green materials. The
physical properties and mechanical performance of particleboard are determined by the
three key variables of (i) different mix designs or compositions of sawdust to coconut fibre
in percentage; (ii) resin content; and (iii) thickness groups (16 mm, 20 mm, and 32 mm).
Ultimately, the optimum composition of sawdust to coconut fibre as well as thickness
groups will be addressed.

1.1. Composition of Waste Material, Resin Content and Hot-Press Temperature Utilized in
Particleboard Making Process
The manufacture of fibreboards from coconut husks was studied in 2004 and it was
discovered that coconut coir and fibre have a percentage of lignin that is more than
130 ◦ C heat thermally robust and can create fibreboards without the use of chemical
Buildings 2021, 11, 256 3 of 24

binders [8]. Particleboards now have a multitude of properties, including optimal design
stability for simple assembly lines, reliable quality, dimensional range, and user-friendly
physical characteristics. They can be used for a variety of purposes, including office
and residential furniture, soundproofing, home decking, ceiling, roofing, and shuttering,
cabinets, partitioning, cladding stair treads, underlying floor, table, shelving, store fixtures,
wall bracing, ceiling boarding, home constructions, sliding doors, kitchen shelves, interior
signs, exam pad, photo lamination, and for low-cost cabins.
Many factors can affect particleboard characteristics, including wood species, fibre
structures, stiffness, hardness, compressibility, particle shape and size, and particle drying
technology [9]. The medium-size particle performed well for binder-less and melamine
urea formaldehyde (MUF) bonded boards. When 16% MUF was used, the bonded board of
MUF performed best. According to Ahmed (2016), the product consistency with 16% MUF
is superior to binder-less coir pith board. Coconut coir board, as well as wood replacements,
will provide sustainable, inexpensive, and long-lasting materials for building and packag-
ing [10]. At a low cost, urea formaldehyde is often used for indoor panels. However, these
binders are not waterproof and emit poisonous and carcinogenic formaldehyde. Many of
these binders are hazardous to one’s health and the environment. It is well known that
reducing the use of formaldehyde causes poor mechanical properties of particle boards.
Since reducing formaldehyde does not eliminate harmful emissions, this negative impact
is reduced by plating or chemical modifications [11].
According to El-Kassas et al. (2013), the properties of the manufactured fiberboards
are affected by the average density and resin content [12]. Akinyemi (2016) discovered in
his analysis that panel density rose as sawdust composition decreased, reaching a plateau
at 25% before plummeting dramatically. However, as the proportion of corn cob rose,
particleboard density increased significantly, but a substantial decrease was observed after
the plateau at 75% corn cob. The density of the corn cob panels was smaller than that of the
sawdust panels. The obtained density is comparable to particleboard densities between
590 and 800 kg/m3 in the wood processing industries [13]. Paridah (2014) discovered
that particleboards with 10% resin and 50:50 (RW: KS) have the best strength (19.08 MPa),
whereas particleboards with 70:30 (RW: KS) have a higher strength (2.23 GPa). The RW: KS
ratio has a greater influence on thickness swelling (TS) and water absorption (WA) than the
resin level. Hybrid particleboards made of 70% RW, 30% KS, and 10% resin material exhibit
all positive properties and are equal to 100% RW (control) samples. It was concluded that
kenaf stem would replace rubber-wood particles up to 50%, but resin levels must be kept
at 10% or higher because a lower level of resin (68%) significantly decreases particleboard
power [14].
The pre-pressed mats were pressed for 5 min in a hot press with the temperature
and pressure set at 160 ◦ C and 3 N/mm2 respectively [10]. The pressing cycle was then
carried out using the daylight press at a pressing plate temperature of 180 ◦ C and sufficient
pressure to achieve the desired panel density and thickness. The panel was pressed for
12–13 s per millimetre of thickness [12]. The pressing process has the following time,
temperature, and pressing specifications: (i) for the high density (HDF) fibreboard, 220 ◦ C
and 320 kgf/cm2 for 4 min; (ii) for the medium density (MDF) fibreboard, 210 ◦ C and
320 kgf/cm2 for 4 min.; (iii) and for the MDF UF fibreboard, 160 ◦ C and 100 kgf/cm2 for
10 min. When compared to conventional hot-pressing, which is typically performed by
conduction heating from the surface, high frequency (HF) hot-pressing can significantly
reduce pressing time, as shown in Figure 1 [15].
Buildings 2021, 11, 256 4 of 24
Buildings 2021, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 26

Figure1.1.The
Figure Thegraph
graphof
oftemperatures
temperaturesof
ofcenter
centerlayer
layeragainst
againstpressing
pressingtime
time[15].
[15].

1.2. Coconut Fibre as Green Material for Building

1.2. Coconut Fibre as Green Material for Building
As alternatives to concrete formulation, various sources of natural fibres are investi-
As alternatives to concrete formulation, various sources of natural fibres are
gated, which can be separated into two categories: field or agricultural waste and product
investigated, which can be separated into two categories: field or agricultural waste and
crops. Agriculture waste types of natural fibres used in the formulation of green concrete
product crops. Agriculture waste types of natural fibres used in the formulation of green
and other construction materials include coconut coir, rice husks, palm oil fuel ash, bagasse,
concrete and other construction materials include coconut coir, rice husks, palm oil fuel
wood chips, bamboo leaf ash, bananas, wheat straw, stroke, and sisal, as well as natural
ash, bagasse, wood chips, bamboo leaf ash, bananas, wheat straw, stroke, and sisal, as well
fibre from commodity crops such as kenaf, jute, and hemp [16].
as natural fibre from commodity crops such as kenaf, jute, and hemp [16].
Coconut fibre is readily available. Several studies on the use of coconut fibre in a
Coconut fibre is readily available. Several studies on the use of coconut fibre in a
matrix polymer composite have been conducted. It has low thermal conductivity and a high
matrix polymer composite
weight-to-strength have been
ratio. Coconut fibreconducted.
is an excellent It has low thermal
solution conductivity
to potentially and a
hazardous
high weight-to-strength ratio. Coconut fibre is an excellent
construction materials [17]. Coconut fibre is extracted from the external shell of a coconut solution to potentially
hazardous
fruit, construction
also known materialsis[17].
as coir Coconut mostly Coconut fibrein
cultivated is tropical
extracted and from the external
subtropical shell
climates.
of a coconut fruit, also known as coir Coconut is mostly
Ghana produces approximately 305,000 tonnes of coconut per year, which generates a large cultivated in tropical and
subtropical
amount climates.
of waste in the Ghana
world.produces
Coconutapproximately
fibres are usually 305,000presenttonnes of coconut
in three forms: per year,
(1) long
which generates a large amount of waste in the world. Coconut
fibre bristle, (2) short fibre mattress, and (3) decorticated (mixed fibre lengths). Coconut fibres are usually present
in three
fibre has forms:
not been (1)widely
long fibre
usedbristle, (2) short fibre
in manufacturing, butmattress,
it has strong and engineering
(3) decorticated (mixed
properties.
fibre lengths). Coconut fibre has not been widely used in manufacturing,
Coconut fibre measurements vary and are assumed to be affected by the form, position, but it has strong
engineering properties. Coconut fibre measurements vary and
and maturity of the coconut plant. The flexibility and breakup of the fibre are influenced by are assumed to be affected
by length
the the form, position, (aspect
to diameter and maturity
proportion)of theofcoconut
the fibre,plant.
which The flexibility
defines and
its use. Thebreakup
primary of
the fibre areofinfluenced
constituents coconut fibre by the
are length
cellulose,to diameter (aspect
hemicellulose, andproportion)
lignin, which of the fibre, which
influence both
defines
the its use.
physical andThe primary constituents
mechanical properties ofof thecoconut fibre are cellulose, hemicellulose, and
fibre [18].
lignin, which influence both the physical and mechanical
Coconut fibre is the toughest natural fibre because it contains properties moreofthan
the fibre [18]. as
30% lignin,
Coconut fibre is the toughest natural fibre because it contains
seen in Table 1, which makes the fibres tougher and more rigid by providing compressive more than 30% lignin,
as seen tointhe
strength Table
tissue1,and which
fibremakes
as well the fibres tougher
as strengthening theand moretorigid
cell wall shieldby theproviding
carbohy-
compressive
drates strengthortophysical
from chemical the tissue and Coconut
harm. fibre as well
fibresascan
strengthening
be 4–6 timesthe cell strained
more wall to shield
than
the carbohydrates
other from chemical
fibres. Furthermore, or physical
when stored harm. Coconut
and exposed to sunshine, fibres can be fibre
coconut 4–6 times
retainsmore
its
strained
power. The than otheroffibres.
density Furthermore,
the coconut when stored
fibre is critical and exposed
in deciding the totalto sunshine,
weight coconut
required for
fibre
the retainsfibreboard
coconut its power. The The
panel. density the coconut
use of coconut fibre fibre is critical
in furniture in deciding
production the total
is increasing
due to itsrequired
weight properties.for Coconut
the coconutfibrefibreboard
is thicker thanpanel. wood
The fibre
use of according
coconut to research
fibre [19].
in furniture
production is increasing due to its properties. Coconut fibre is thicker than wood fibre
according to research [19].
Buildings 2021, 11, 256 5 of 24

Table 1. Chemical Composition and Physical Properties of Coconut Fibre [19].

Chemical Composition (%) Physical Properties

Halocellulose (56.3%) Density = 1.2 g/cm3
α-cellulose (44.2%) Elongation at break = 30%
Lignin (32.8%) Tensile Strength = 175 MPa
Young Modulus = 4 to 6 GPa
Ash (2.2%)
Water Absorption = 130–180%

1.3. Research Gap

The Malaysian government has encouraged the construction industry to transition to
an industrialized building system (IBS), which can deliver a large number of houses at a low
cost, especially low-cost houses. Government agencies, such as Jabatan Kerja Raya (JKR)
and the Construction Industry Development Board (CIDB), as well as academics, have
played critical roles in educating the construction industry’s key players through policies,
financial incentives, strategy guides, conferences, and seminars to raise awareness among
end users and clients. The industrialization of high-rise residential building components
is vital to competitiveness and has emerged as a growing trend in order to address the
housing crisis and satisfy the demand for affordable housing, especially in large cities with
limited construction capacity. Almost all of Asia’s big cities have apartment buildings that
are high-rise and dense [20].
Concrete supplemented with green fibre and the thermal behaviours of the improved
strength concrete have not been thoroughly studied. On the other hand, the green fibre
or lignocellulose materials added in the production of wood-based composite building
materials also demand further study. Moreover, the selected material used in this study,
coconut fibre mix with sawdust particles, can be studied not only in terms of physical and
mechanical properties. The particleboard could also be another innovative material for
construction applications in future.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Research Design and Operational Framework
Hybrid fibre-particleboard was chosen, incorporating the use of sawdust particles
and coconut fibre in a building material composite. Heveaboard (M) Sdn Bhd provided
the sawdust particle and resin used in this analysis. Resin used in this study is urea-
formaldehyde (UF) resin with a solid content of 64%. This UF resin is currently used on
an industrial scale for particleboard manufacturing and has a dynamic viscosity of 150 to
250 cps at 30 ◦ C and gel time reactivity of 120 to 160 s at 100 ◦ C. Coconut fibre was made by
shredding and grinding long fibres using a hammer mill crushing machine. Following that,
the coconut fibre was sieved on a vibration table using a rectangle handmade wood sieve
of 5 mm, 3 mm, 1 mm, and pan, as well as for sawdust. The sawdust and coconut fibre
retained at 5 mm would then be separated for board production and particle size analysis
using a vertical sieve shaker as shown in Figure 2. Both sawdust and coconut fibres were
then oven-dried for 24 h at 80 ◦ C to minimise moisture content.
 Buildings 2021, 11, 256 6 of 24
Buildings 2021, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of

Figure
Figure 2. Sawdust
2. Sawdust Particle
Particle and and Coconut
Coconut Fibre Preparations.
Fibre Preparations.

Upon
Upon mixing process,
mixing process,sawdust,
sawdust,coconut fibre, and
coconut fibre,resin
andwill be weighed
resin to their to the
will be weighed
respective
respective percentage proportions and mixed together in a drum mixer forThe
percentage proportions and mixed together in a drum mixer for 10 min. 10 min. Th
percentage proportion of sawdust and coconut fibre is designed dependent on the targeted
percentage proportion of sawdust and coconut fibre is designed dependent on th
density. The experimental boards were designed to have a density of 650 kg/m3 , which
targeted density. The experimental boards were designed to have a density of 650 kg/m
is the typical density of particleboard made in industrial conditions from wood particles.
UFwhich is the
resin was typical
applied density
to the of particleboard
single-mat configurationmade
at an 8inwt.%
industrial conditions
depending from woo
on particle
particles. UF resin was applied to the single-mat configuration at
weight. Section 2.3 Mix Design Calculation shows the calculation for determining the an 8 wt.% depending o
particle
weight weight. Section
of sawdust, coconut 2.3 Mix
fibre, andDesign Calculation shows the calculation for determinin
resin content.
theTable
weight of sawdust,
2 shows coconut
the fifteen differentfibre, and
styles resin content.
of boards that were made as shown Figure 3.
The boards
Table 2 shows the fifteen different styles of boards at
were created in the Timber Fabrication Laboratory Universiti
that were madeTun Hussein
as shown Figu
Onn
3. The boards were created in the Timber Fabrication Laboratory measuring
Malaysia using the hot press of hydraulic compression machine with plates at Universiti Tu
450 mm × 450 mm. The particleboards were manually formed in wooden formwork at
Hussein Onn Malaysia using the hot press of hydraulic compression machine with plat
top and stainless-steel frames at bottom with dimensions of 350 mm × 350 mm × T mm,
measuring 450 mm × 450 mm. The particleboards were manually formed in woode
where T is the particleboard thickness. The particleboard thicknesses used in this study are
formwork at top and stainless-steel frames at bottom with dimensions of 350 mm × 3
mm × T mm, where T is the particleboard thickness. The particleboard thicknesses use
in this study are 16 mm, 20 mm, and 32 mm. Boards measuring 350 mm × 350 mm we
then hot-pressed for 7 min at 180 °C under 2.5 to 3.0 N/mm2 strain. After pressing, th
Buildings 2021, 11, 256 7 of 24

16 mm, 20 mm, and 32 mm. Boards measuring 350 mm × 350 mm were then hot-pressed
for 7 min at 180 ◦ C under 2.5 to 3.0 N/mm2 strain. After pressing, the particleboards
were conditioned for one week at 20 ◦ C and 65% relative humidity before being evaluated
physical and mechanical properties. To avoid edge defects, the particleboards were first
trimmed to a final dimension of 300 mm × 300 × T mm. Each board type was used for
3 replication samples, and test pieces for mechanical and physical examination were cut
from each particleboard sample. Physical properties such as swelling in thickness and
water absorption both are tested under same condition by immersion of test pieces in
water bath with room temperature for 24 h. The mechanical performance of particleboards,
such as modulus of elasticity and modulus of rupture, in bending strength and internal
bonding are tested by using same universal testing machine. Specifications, criteria, and
results of particleboard panel sampling and testing will be addressed in compliance with
the equivalent British Standard (BS) for particleboard specification.

2.2. Particle Size Distribution

Coconut fibre was sieved using a rectangle handmade wood sieve of 5 mm, 3 mm, 1 mm,
and pan, as well as for sawdust on a vibration table. After that, sawdust and coconut fibre
retained at 5 mm were separated for board making and the particle size analysis using vertical
sieve shaker. Particle size distribution analysis for sawdust and coconut fibre respectively
employed U.S. Standard Sieves–AASHTO M 92, which were then plotted into a S-curve, as
shown in Figures 4 and 5. After the sieving process, it was found that both the sawdust and
coconut fibre might not have sieved properly, so the S-curve in Figures 4 and 5 only can be used
as benchmark to identify the size distribution of materials where the particle and fibre size are
more than 2.36 mm, and where only sawdust particles and coconut fibre with size 5 mm are
used in particle size distribution analysis after shaking using a vibration table at the beginning
stage of material preparations. It is much more difficult, if not impossible, to achieve those
optimum positions for flaky particles or longer rods or fibre [21].

Table 2. Design Mixed of Board Sample According to Respective Mass.

% Proportion of Mixed Design Mass of Materials (g)

(%SD: %CF-Thickness Sawdust Coconut Fibre
Group(T)) Resin
Particles (SD) (CF)
100SD:0CF-T16 1190.22 0 153.32
70SD:30CF-T16 833.15 357.07 153.32
50SD:50CF-T16 595.11 595.11 153.32
30SD:70CF-T16 357.07 833.15 153.32
0SD:100CF-T16 0 1190.22 153.32
100SD:0CF-T20 1487.77 0 191.65
70SD:30CF-T20 1041.44 446.33 191.65
50SD:50CF-T20 743.89 743.89 191.65
30SD:70CF-T20 446.33 1041.44 191.65
0SD:100CF-T20 0 1487.77 191.65
100SD:0CF-T32 1853.28 0 238.73
70SD:30CF-T32 1297.30 555.98 238.73
50SD:50CF-T32 926.64 926.64 238.73
30SD:70CF-T32 555.98 1297.30 238.73
0SD:100CF-T32 0 1853.28 238.73
 Buildings 2021, 11, 256 8 of 24
Buildings 2021, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 2

Figure3. 3.
Figure Particleboard
Particleboard Making
Making Process
Process and Testing.
and Testing.

2.2. Particle Size Distribution

Coconut fibre was sieved using a rectangle handmade wood sieve of 5 mm, 3 mm,
mm, and pan, as well as for sawdust on a vibration table. After that, sawdust and coconu
fibre retained at 5 mm were separated for board making and the particle size analys
using vertical sieve shaker. Particle size distribution analysis for sawdust and coconu
fibre respectively employed U.S. Standard Sieves–AASHTO M 92, which were the
plotted into a S-curve, as shown in Figures 4 and 5. After the sieving process, it was foun
that both the sawdust and coconut fibre might not have sieved properly, so the S-curve i
Buildings 2021, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 26

and coconut fibre with size 5 mm are used in particle size distribution analysis after
and coconut
shaking usingfibre with size
a vibration table5 at
mm theare used instage
beginning particle size distribution
of material analysis
preparations. after
Buildings 2021, 11, 256 9Itofis24much
shaking
more using aif vibration
difficult, table attothe
not impossible, beginning
achieve thosestage of material
optimum preparations.
positions It is much
for flaky particles or
more difficult, if not impossible, to achieve those optimum positions for flaky particles or
longer rods or fibre [21].
longer rods or fibre [21].

Figure 4. 4.
Figure Particle
ParticleSize
SizeDistribution forSawdust
Distribution for Sawdust Particle.
Particle.
Figure 4. Particle Size Distribution for Sawdust Particle.

Figure 5. Particle Size Distribution for Coconut Fibre.

Figure 5.5.Particle
Figure ParticleSize
Size Distribution forCoconut
Distribution for Coconut Fibre.
Fibre.
2.3. Mix Design Calculation
2.3. Mix Design Calculation
The design of percentage proportion of sawdust and coconut fibre are based of
The density.
targeted design ofThe
percentage proportion [22]
sample calculation of sawdust
for the and
mixedcoconut
designfibre are based
of hybrid of
fibre-
targeted density.
particleboard The sample
are shown in stepscalculation [22]
1–4 and each for the
design mixmixed designin of
is tabulated hybrid
Table 2. fibre-
particleboard are shown in steps 1–4 and each design mix is tabulated in Table 2.
Buildings 2021, 11, 256 10 of 24

2.3. Mix Design Calculation

The design of percentage proportion of sawdust and coconut fibre are based of targeted
density. The sample calculation [22] for the mixed design of hybrid fibre-particleboard are
shown in steps 1–4 and each design mix is tabulated in Table 2.
(1) Determine the dimension of board sample
Board dimension (cm3 ) = width × length × thickness. For example,
Board dimension (cm3 ) = 34 cm × 34 cm × 1.6 cm. Therefore,
Board dimension (cm3 ) = 1849.60 cm3
(2) Determine the wet and dry mass of board
Targeted density = 0.65 g/cm3
Wet mass (g) = Board Dimension × Targeted Density
Wet mass (g) = 0.65 g/cm3 × 1849.60 cm3
Wet mass (g) = 1322.50 g
Dry mass (g) = Moisture content (%) × Wet Mass (g)
Dry mass (g) = 10% × 1322.50 g
Dry mass (g) = 1190.20 g
(3) Determine mass of resin content
Solid resin content = 64.51% (given by supplier)
Design resin content = 8%
Mass of resin content = (Design resin content/Solid resin content) × Dry mass ×
wastage
Mass of resin content = (8/64.51) × 1190.20 g × 5% (wastage)
Mass of resin content = 153.32 g
(4) Determine mass of sawdust and coconut by percentage of proportion design
Let say,
Percentage proportion of sawdust to coconut fibre = 70SD:30CF
(70% sawdust to 30% coconut fibre)
Mass of sawdust (g) = 70% × (D)
Mass of sawdust (g) = 70% × 1190.20 g = 833.15 g
Mass of coconut fibre (g) = 30% × (D)
Mass of coconut fibre (g) = 30% × 1190.20 g = 357.07 g

2.4. To Determine a Suitable Mix Design of Waste by Relying on the Optimum Performance of
Physical Properties and Mechanical Performances
2.4.1. Physical Properties of Boards
The test pieces of board sample were subjected to several tests to determine the
physical properties and mechanical performance. Table 3 is the extracted values from
BS EN 312-2010 [23] requirement for particleboards. All test pieces were compared to
the values and the type of particleboard. Physical properties, such as thickness swelling,
as well as mechanical performance on bending strength and tensile strength, are shown
according to thickness group in this study. However, the benchmark for this study is non
loading board for use in humid conditions, Type P3.
Buildings 2021, 11, 256 11 of 24

Table 3. Requirement Values for Type P3 Board (extracted from BS EN 312-2010).

Buildings 2021, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW Modulus of Elasticity Internal 11 of 26
Bending Strength Thickness
Board Type Thickness in Bending–MOE Bonding
(N/mm2 ) 2 2 Swelling (%)
(N/mm ) (N/mm )
Non load-bearing >13–20Determination
mm 14
of Density (BS EN 323: 1993)1950 0.45after Immersion 14
and Swelling in Thickness
boards for use in
>20–25inmmWater (BS EN 317:1993) 12 1850 0.4 13
humid
>25–32
Buildings 2021, 11, x FOR PEER mm
REVIEW In accordance to
11 BS EN 323: 1993 [24], the
1700 test pieces must be square in
0.35 11 of 26 shape, with 13
conditions-P3
sides of a nominal length of 50 mm, and must be sampled and cut in compliance with EN
326-1, as shown in Figure 6a and selection of test pieces from board sample as shown in
Determination
Figure 6b. Micrometre of Density
or EN (BS EN 323:
equivalent 1993) and Swelling in Thickness after Immersion in
Determination of Density (BS 323: 1993)measuring
and Swellinginstrument
in Thicknesswith after smooth
Immersion and parallel
Water (BS
circular EN 317:1993)
measuring surfaces of (16 ± 1) mm diameter and a force of action of (4 ± 1) N. The
in Water (BS EN 317:1993)
In
apparatus’s accordance
graduation to BS
must EN
make 323: 1993
readings [24],
down theto test
0.01 pieces
mm.
In accordance to BS EN 323: 1993 [24], the test pieces must be square in shape, with Eachmusttest be square
piece is in
weighed shape, with
with
sidesaofprecision
sides of a nominal
a nominal of 0.01length
length g.50Inmm,
of conjunction
ofand
50 must
mm,be with
and EN
must
sampled 325,
andbethe
cut dimensions
sampled
in complianceand ofwith
each
cut intest
EN object
compliance with
are measured
326-1, as shown as inshown
Figure in
6a Figure
and 7a–c.
selection The
of thickness,
test pieces from t, is measured
board
EN 326-1, as shown in Figure 6a and selection of test pieces from board sample as shown sample to
as a precision
shown in of 0.05
Figure
mm 6b. Micrometre
at the point or equivalent
of intersection measuring instrument with smooth and parallel
in Figure 6b. Micrometre orofequivalent
the diagonals shown in
measuring Figure
instrument6a (unless
withthis coincides
smooth and parallel
circular
with a measuring
surface surfaces ofthat
irregularity (16 ± 1) mm
may diameter
affect the and a force of action
measurement). Slowlyof (4 ± 1) N.
apply The
the measuring
circular measuring surfaces of (16 ± 1) mm diameter
apparatus’s graduation must make readings down to 0.01 mm. Each test piece is weighed and a force of action of (4 ± 1) N. The
tool to the measurement piece’s surfaces. To a precision of 0.1 mm, measure b1 and b2 at
apparatus’s
with a precisiongraduation must make
of 0.01 g. In conjunction withreadings
EN 325, the down to 0.01ofmm.
dimensions each Each test piece is weighed
test object
two points parallel to the edges of the test object, along lines that move through the centres
with
are a precision
measured as shown of 0.01 g. In7a–c.
in Figure conjunction with
The thickness, EN
t, is 325, the
measured to dimensions
a precision of 0.05 of each test object are
of
mm opposite edges.
at the point The density
of intersection of adiagonals
of the board isshowncalculated
in Figure by 6ataking
(unlessthe integer
this coincidesmean of the
measured
densities
as
of all
shown
test pieces
in Figure
taken
7a–c.
from the
The thickness,
themeasurement).
same board and
t, is measured
is expressed
to a precision of 0.05 mm
in kg/m3 to three
with a surface irregularity that may affect Slowly apply the measuring
at the point
significant of intersection
figures.
tool to the measurement Thepiece’s
density ofρtheof diagonals
surfaces. each shown
test piece
To a precision (inmm,
of 0.1
in
kg/m Figure 6ab1be
3) shall
measure
(unless
and
this coincides
calculated
b2 at from with
a surface
Equation
two irregularity
points(1).
parallel thatofmay
to the edges affect
the test object,the measurement).
along lines that move through Slowlythe apply
centres the measuring tool
toopposite
of the measurement
Equationedges.(1).The piece’s
density
Determination of asurfaces.
board Toofa Boards
is calculated
of Density precision
by taking of the0.1 mm,mean
integer measure
of the b1 and b2 at two
densities of all test to
points parallel pieces
thetaken
edgesfrom
ofthe
thesame
testboard andalong
object, is expressed
linesinthat
kg/m 3 to three
move through the centres
significant figures. The density ρ of each test𝑚piece (in kg/m36) shall be calculated from
of opposite edges. The density 𝜌= of a board is calculated
× 10 by taking the integer mean of the
Equation (1). 𝑏from (1) 3
densities of all test pieces taken 1 × 𝑏the
2 ×same
𝑡 board and is expressed in kg/m to three
Equation (1). Determination of Density of Boards
significant figures. 3
where m is the mass of The density
board, ρ of
in gram, b1, each test
b2 is the piece (inofkg/m
dimension board, )inshall be calculated
millimetre, and from
𝑚
Equation (1).
t is the thickness of board, in𝜌millimeter.
= × 10 6
𝑏1 × 𝑏2 × 𝑡 (1)

where m is the mass of board, in gram, b1, b2 is the dimension of board, in millimetre, and
t is the thickness of board, in millimeter.

(a) (b)
Figure
Figure6.6.(a)(a)
Point of(a)
Point Measurement; (b) Test
of Measurement; (b) piece from(b)
chosenchosen
Test piece a from
sample board. board.
a sample
Figure 6. (a) Point of Measurement; (b) Test piece chosen from a sample board.

(a)
(a) (b) (b) (c) (c)
Figure 7.
Figure Each specimen being measured for its (a)its
thickness; (b) area; and (c) weight
(c)toweight
determine
Figure7.7.Each
Eachspecimen
specimenbeing measured
being measuredfor (a) its
for thickness; (b)
(a) thickness;area; and
(b) area; and (c)toweight
determine
to determine
the density of particleboard determination of swelling in thickness after immersion in water (BS EN
the
the density
density of particleboard
of particleboarddetermination
determinationof swelling
of in
swellingthickness
in after
thicknessimmersion
after in water (BS
immersion in EN
water (BS EN
317:1993).
317:1993).
317:1993).
Buildings 2021, 11, 256 12 of 24

Equation (1). Determination of Density of Boards

m
ρ= × 106 (1)
b1 × b2 × t
Buildings 2021, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 12 of 26
where m is the mass of board, in gram, b1 , b2 is the dimension of board, in millimetre, and t
is the thickness of board, in millimeter.
In accordance
In accordance withwith BS
BS EN
EN 317:
317: 1993
1993 [25],
[25], the
the thickness
thickness of of each
each test
test piece
piece must
must be
be
determined to
determined toaaprecision of 0.01
precision mmmm
of 0.01 at theatintersection of the diagonals
the intersection (Figure 8).
of the diagonals Immerse
(Figure 8).
the test pieces, faces up, in clear, still water with a pH of 7 ± 1 and a temperature
Immerse the test pieces, faces up, in clear, still water with a pH of 7 ± 1 and a temperature of
(20 ± 1) ◦ C. This temperature must be preserved during the duration of the test. During
of (20 ± 1) °C. This temperature must be preserved during the duration of the test. During
the test,
the test, the
the test
testpieces
piecesmust
mustbebekept
keptapart
apart from
fromone another
one anotheras well as from
as well the bottom
as from and
the bottom
sides of the water bath. Throughout the procedure, the upper edges of the
and sides of the water bath. Throughout the procedure, the upper edges of the test pieces test pieces must
be surrounded
must be surroundedby (25by±(25
5) mm
± 5) of
mm water. AfterAfter
of water. eacheach
test, test,
the water mustmust
the water be changed. The
be changed.
immersion times must be as defined by the individual criteria for each
The immersion times must be as defined by the individual criteria for each board type. board type.

Figure
Figure 8.
8. Test
Test piece
piece for
for the
the measurement
measurement and
and Test pieces immersed
Test pieces immersed in
in water
water for
for 24
24 h.
h.

After
After the
the immersion
immersion period
period has
has passed,
passed, withdraw
withdraw the
the test
test pieces
pieces from
from the
the bath,
bath, shake
shake
off
off any extra water, and measure the thickness of each test piece. The swelling in thickness
any extra water, and measure the thickness of each test piece. The swelling in thickness
of
of each
each test piece, Gt, expressed
expressed as a percentage of initial thickness, must be measured
using
using thethe Equation
Equation (2) (2) below. The swelling in thickness of a board is the arithmetic mean
of
of all
all test
test pieces
pieces taken
taken from
from that
that board
board and is expressed
expressed in percentage, to one decimal. The
same
same equation can can bebeused
usedtotocalculate
calculatethe
thewater
water absorption
absorption of of a board,
a board, where
where t1 and
t1 and t2
t2 are
are the mass
the mass of theoftest
thepiece
test before
piece before immersion
immersion and the and
massthe mass
of the testofpiece
the after
test piece after
immersion
immersion
in gram (g).in gram (g).
Equation (2). Determination of thickness swelling

𝑡2t−
2 −𝑡t11
t =
𝐺𝑡G= × 100
× 100 (2)
𝑡1t1 (2)

where tt11 is
where is the
the thickness
thickness ofof the
the test
test piece
piece before
before immersion, in millimetres
immersion, in and tt22 is
millimetres and is the
the
thickness of the test piece after immersion, in millimetres.
thickness of the test piece after immersion, in millimetres.
2.4.2. Mechanical Performances of Boards
2.4.2. Mechanical Performances of Boards
Determination of Particleboard’s Modulus of Elasticity and Modulus of Rupture (BS EN
310:1993)
Determination of Particleboard’s Modulus of Elasticity and Modulus of Rupture (BS EN
Every test piece’s diameter and thickness should be measured in accordance with
310:1993)
EN 325 at the following points: the thickness at the diagonal intersection; the width at
Every test piece’s diameter and thickness should be measured in accordance with EN
mid-length. Meanwhile, the width and thickness of test pieces are 50 mm and as defined in
325 at the following points: the thickness at the diagonal intersection; the width at mid-
length. Meanwhile, the width and thickness of test pieces are 50 mm and as defined in
thickness group (16 mm, 20 mm, and 32 mm). Adjust the distance between the support
centres to within 1 mm of 20 times the nominal thickness of the material, but not less than
100 mm or more than 1000 mm. In this study, the distance is set at 200 mm. To the nearest
Buildings 2021, 11, 256 13 of 24

thickness group (16 mm, 20 mm, and 32 mm). Adjust the distance between the support
centres to within 1 mm of 20 times the nominal thickness of the material, but not less than
100 mm or more than 1000 mm. In this study, the distance is set at 200 mm. To the nearest
0.5 mm, measure the distance between the centres of the supports. Place the test piece flat
on the supports, with its longitudinal axis at right angles to those of the supports with the
centre
Buildings 2021, 11, x FOR PEER point
REVIEWunder the load (Figures 9 and 10). The load shall be applied at a constant rate
14 of 26
Buildings 2021,of
11,cross-head
x FOR PEER REVIEW
movement throughout the test. 14 of 26

(a)
(a)

(b) (c)
(b) (c)
Figure 9. (a) Arrangement
Figure 9. (a)ofArrangement
the bending apparatus, (b) Crossapparatus,
of the bending section of tubular boards,
(b) Cross (c) Load-deflection
section curve within
of tubular boards, (c) Load-
Figure
the range 9. (a) deformation.
of elastic Arrangement of the bending apparatus, (b) Cross section of tubular boards, (c) Load-deflection curve within
deflection curve within the range of elastic deformation.
the range of elastic deformation.

(a) (b)
(a) (b)
Figure 10. Mechanical properties for each particleboard determined by (a) the specimen tested using Universal Testing
Figure
Machine; 10.
(b) after Mechanical
failure,
Figure 10. the properties
graph for each
andproperties
Mechanical value particleboard
for Modulus determined
for eachofparticleboard
Elasticity byand
(MOE) (a) the specimen
Modulus
determined tested
of Rupture
by (a) the using
(MOR)Universal
specimen appeared
tested Testing
using
Machine; (b) after failure, the graph and value for Modulus of Elasticity (MOE) and Modulus of Rupture (MOR) appeared
on screen.
Universal Testing Machine; (b) after failure, the graph and value for Modulus of Elasticity (MOE)
on screen.
and Modulus of Rupture (MOR) appeared on screen.
Determination of Tensile Strength Perpendicular to the Plane of the Board or Internal
BondingDetermination
(BS 319:1993)of Tensile Strength Perpendicular to the Plane of the Board or Internal
Bonding (BS 319:1993)
The test pieces must be square and have a side length of (50 ± 1) mm. The test pieces
The testcut,
must be precisely pieces
the must
anglesbemust
square
be and
90°, have a side
and the length
edges mustof be
(50smooth
± 1) mm. The
and test pieces
clean.
must be precisely cut, the angles must be 90°, and the edges must be smooth and clean.
Buildings 2021, 11, 256 14 of 24

The loading rate must be adjusted such that the maximum load is achieved in
(60 ± 30) s. Measure the deflection in the centre of the test piece (below the loading head)
to an accuracy of 0.1 mm and map these values against the equivalent loads estimated to
an accuracy of 1% of the measured volume. If incremental readings are used to calculate
deflection, at least 6 pairs of readings must be used. Record the full load with a precision of
1% of the calculated value. Test two sets of test pieces in each of the board’s two directions,
i.e., in the longitudinal and transverse directions. Check half of the test pieces of each group
with the “top face” upwards and half with the “bottom face” upwards. The modulus of
elasticity, Em (in N/mm2 ), of each test piece shall be expressed to three significant figures,
calculated from Equation (3) [26].
Equation (3). Determination of Modulus of Elasticity of Board

(l1 )3 ( F2 − F1 )
Em = (3)
4 bt3 ( a2 − a1 )

where,
l1 is the distance between the centres of the supports, in millimetres;
b is the width of the test piece, in millimetres;
t is the thickness of the test piece, in millimetres;
F2 − F1 is the increment of load on the straight-line portion of the load-deflection
curve Figure 9c in N. F1 shall be approximately 10% and F2 shall be approximately 40% of
the maximum load;
a2 − a1 is the increment of deflection at the mid-length of the test piece (corresponding
to F2 − F1 ).
The bending strength of each test piece shall be expressed to three significant figures.
The bending strength for each group of test pieces taken from the same board is the
arithmetic mean of the bending strengths of the appropriate test pieces, expressed to three
significant figures. The bending strength f m (in N/mm2 ), of each test piece, is calculated
from the Equation (4) [26].
Equation (4). Determination of Bending Strength (Modulus of Rupture) of Boards

3 Fmax l1
fm = (4)
2 bt2
where,
Fmax is the maximum load, in Newtons;
l1 , b, and t are in millimetres;

Determination of Tensile Strength Perpendicular to the Plane of the Board or Internal

Bonding (BS 319:1993)
The test pieces must be square and have a side length of (50 ± 1) mm. The test pieces
must be precisely cut, the angles must be 90◦ , and the edges must be smooth and clean.
As seen in Figures 11 and 12, each test piece must be bound to the loading blocks with
a suitable adhesive. Excess glue that has been pressed away from the glue line must be
cleaned. If hot-melt glue is used, the screen side of hardboards must be sanded to create a
smooth finish. If the panel side cannot be sanded, a gap-filling glue (epoxy glue) must be
used. Additional pressures affecting the test piece caused by the moisture in the adhesive
and the increase in temperature, for example, should be followed to prevent when glueing.
The experiments must not be performed until the adhesive has had enough time to recover
so that the rupture does not occur in the glueline and the test pieces can recover an equal
distribution of moisture.
 cleaned. If hot-melt glue is used, the screen side of hardboards must be sanded to create a
As seen in Figures 11 and 12, each test piece must be bound to the loading blocks with a
smooth finish. If the panel side cannot be sanded, a gap-filling glue (epoxy glue) must be
suitable adhesive. Excess glue that has been pressed away from the glue line must be
used. Additional pressures affecting the test piece caused by the moisture in the adhesive
cleaned. If hot-melt glue is used, the screen side of hardboards must be sanded to create a
and the increasesmooth
in temperature,
finish. If the for example,
panel should
side cannot be followed
be sanded, to glue
a gap-filling prevent
(epoxywhen
glue) must be
Buildings 2021, 11, 256
glueing. The experiments must not be performed until the adhesive has had enough
used. Additional pressures affecting the test piece caused by the moisture in15time
the adhesive
of 24
to recover so thatand
the rupture doesinnot
the increase occur in thefor
temperature, glueline andshould
example, the test
bepieces can to
followed recover
prevent when
an equal distribution of moisture.
glueing. The experiments must not be performed until the adhesive has had enough time
to recover so that the rupture does not occur in the glueline and the test pieces can recover
an equal distribution of moisture.

Figure
Figure 11.11. Examples
Examples of of apparatus
apparatus forfor testing
testing tensile
tensile strength perpendicular.
Figure 11. Examples of apparatus forstrength perpendicular.
testing tensile strength perpendicular.

(a) (b)
Figure 12. Tensile12.
Strength
TensilePerpendicular to Plane of Board;
Strength Perpendicular (a) Test
to Plane pieces glued to metal plate and dried for 24 h, (b) The
of Board;
Figure
(a) of apparatus
arrangement during laboratory testing. (b) (a) Test pieces glued to metal plate and
dried for 24 h, (b) The arrangement of apparatus during laboratory testing.
Figure 12. Tensile Strength Perpendicular to Plane of Board; (a) Test pieces glued to metal plate and dried for 24 h, (b) The
In addition, if hot-melt or epoxy glues are used 24 h is adequate, and 72 h if other
arrangement of apparatus during laboratory testing.
In addition, if hot-melt or epoxy glues are used 24 h is adequate, and 72 h if other glues
glues are used. During this time, the glued assembly must be held under controlled
are used. During this time,
conditions of the
(65 ±glued assembly
5)% relative mustand
humidity be held
(20 ± under controlled Test
2) °C temperature. conditions
pieces must be
In addition,
of (65 if hot-melt
± 5)% relative or epoxy glues
± ◦ C used
are 24 h is adequate, and 72 h if other
checked within 1 h of being removed from the conditioning environment. checked
humidity and (20 2) temperature. Test pieces must be Place the testing
glues
withinare1 h
used. During
of being this
removed
assembly time,
from
in the the
the
grips glued
apply assembly
conditioning
and until must
forceenvironment. bePlace
held
the assembly under
the controlled
testing
ruptures. assemblythe test,
Throughout
conditions of (65
in the grips and± apply
5)% relative humidity
force until and (20 ± ruptures.
the assembly 2) °C temperature. Testthe
Throughout pieces
test,must be
the load
checked
shouldwithin 1 h ofat
be applied being removed
a steady rate from the conditioning
of crosshead movement.environment. Place
The loading the
rate testingbe
should
assembly
adjustedinsuch
the that
gripsthe
and apply force
maximum loaduntil the assembly
is achieved in (60ruptures. Throughout
± 30) seconds. Tensilethe test,
strength
perpendicular to the plane of the board of each test piece, ft⊥ , expressed in N/mm to two2

decimals, is calculated according to Equation (5) [27].

Equation (5). Determination of Tensile Strength Perpendicular to the Plane of Board
(Internal Bonding)
Fmax
ft ⊥ = (5)
a×b
where,
Fmax is the breaking load, in Newtons;
a, b is the length and width of the test piece, in millimetres.
Buildings 2021, 11, 256 16 of 24

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Physical Properties of Particleboards
Buildings 2021, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW Table 4 shows example on details on test pieces to determine density, thickness 17 of 26
swelling and water absorption for board 100SD:0CF in thickness group 16 mm. Figure 13
shows all test results on test pieces are from three samples of each type of board from the
summary shown in Table 5.
Table 5. Summary on Density, Thickness Swelling and Water Absorption of Test Pieces of All Boards.

Table 4. Details of Test Pieces to Determine Density, Thickness Swelling and Water Absorption
Averagefor Board 100SD:0CF in
Proportion
Thickness Group 16mm. Thickness Average Average Density Average Water
Thickness
(%SD: %CF) Group (mm) Thickness (mm) (kg/m3) Absorption (%)
Swelling (%)
Thickness Swelling Water Absorption
Thick- Mass
Width.
Cube100SD:0CF Length, Area Volume Density
Ness 16.12 713.56 TS (24HR),
28.46
% TS WA
49.01 % WA
No b1 (mm) b2 (mm) (mm2 ) (mm3 ) (g) (kg/m3 )
70SD:30CF (mm) 16.43 743.00 mm 19.82
(24HR) (24HR), g41.48(24HR)
D1 50SD:50CF
51.15 50.72 16
2594.328 16.10 16.22
41768.681 33 752.30
790.07 23.39 15.98 31.17 62 39.19 46.77
D2 30SD:70CF
49.11 50.61 2485.457 16.15 16.23
40140.132 30 769.70
747.38 23.16 16.41 30.27 57 39.57 47.37
D3 0SD:100CF
50.67 53.58 2714.899 16.11 16.48
43737.016 32 731.77
731.65 23.15 13.28 30.41 63 42.31 49.21
D4 100SD:0CF
54.01 50.7 2738.307 16.27 19.28
44552.255 26 743.76
583.58 21.34 25.80 23.76 56 42.04 53.57
D5 70SD:30CF
49.99 50.64 2531.494 15.92 19.54
40301.378 31 778.38
769.20 22.29 23.70 28.58 59 43.79 47.46
D6 50SD:50CF
51.37 50.64 20
2601.377 16.31 19.32
42428.456 28 758.54
659.93 22.27 21.81 26.76 57 43.76 50.88
D7 30SD:70CF
48.07 50.75 2439.553 16.15 19.57
39398.773 28 747.21
710.68 22.22 14.7327.32 54 40.51 48.15
D8 0SD:100CF
49.96 50.57 2526.477 16.03 19.57
40499.430 30 761.99
740.75 23.2 11.9830.91 59 37.64 49.15
D9 100SD:0CF
50.9 51.91 2642.219 16.09 34.12
42513.304 30 573.23
705.66 21.84 13.44 26.33 59 48.31 49.15
D10 70SD:30CF
48.75 50.93 2482.838 16.25 33.51
40346.109 27 595.74
669.21 21.7 16.3325.12 53 48.69 49.06
D11 50SD:50CF
48.98 50.56 32
2476.429 16.12 36.22
39920.032 30 592.94
751.50 22.45 26.48 28.20 56 55.99 46.43
D12 30SD:70CF
50.85 49.13 2498.261 15.94 33.97
39822.272 28 595.67
703.12 23.71 17.10 32.77 57 51.51 50.88
0SD:100CF Average 16.12 35.18 551.43
713.56 12.0228.46 54.06 49.01

Figure13.
Figure 13.Thickness
ThicknessSwelling
Swellingand
andWater
WaterAbsorption
Absorptionafter
afterImmersion
ImmersionininWater
Water(24
(24h).h).
Buildings 2021, 11, 256 17 of 24

Table 5. Summary on Density, Thickness Swelling and Water Absorption of Test Pieces of All Boards.

Average Average Average Average Water

Proportion Thickness
Thickness Density Thickness Absorption
(%SD: %CF) Group (mm)
(mm) (kg/m3 ) Swelling (%) (%)
100SD:0CF 16.12 713.56 28.46 49.01
70SD:30CF 16.43 743.00 19.82 41.48
50SD:50CF 16 16.22 752.30 15.98 39.19
30SD:70CF 16.23 769.70 16.41 39.57
0SD:100CF 16.48 731.77 13.28 42.31
100SD:0CF 19.28 743.76 25.80 42.04
70SD:30CF 19.54 778.38 23.70 43.79
50SD:50CF 20 19.32 758.54 21.81 43.76
30SD:70CF 19.57 747.21 14.73 40.51
0SD:100CF 19.57 761.99 11.98 37.64
100SD:0CF 34.12 573.23 13.44 48.31
70SD:30CF 33.51 595.74 16.33 48.69
50SD:50CF 32 36.22 592.94 26.48 55.99
30SD:70CF 33.97 595.67 17.10 51.51
0SD:100CF 35.18 551.43 12.02 54.06

3.1.1. Density of Particleboards

The density distribution in particleboard is the mean from the test pieces. The density
designed for the hybrid fibre-particleboard is 650 kg/m3 . For boards in thickness group
of 16 mm, the average density obtained is 742.067 kg/m3 which is 14.16% higher than
the designed density. Meanwhile, for boards in thickness group of 20 mm, the average
density obtained is 757.977 kg/m3 which is 16.61% higher than the designed density. At
last, for boards in thickness group of 32 mm, the average density obtained is 581.801 kg/m3
which is 10.49% lower than the designed density. It is concluded that the density of boards
decreased as the thickness of boards increased. However, all boards in all thickness groups
are comparative to the density of commercial particleboard, ranging from 580 to 810 kg/m3 .

3.1.2. Swelling in Thickness and Water Absorption

The test pieces were immersed in water for 24 h before testing for swelling in thickness
and water absorption. As specified in BS EN 312:1993, the allowable maximum thickness
swelling for thickness group 16 mm is lower than or equal to 14%, for thickness group
20 mm it is lower than or equal to 12%, and for thickness group 32 mm it is lower or
equal to 11%. Firstly, for thickness group 16 mm, only board 0SD:100CF achieved 13.3%
thickness swelling which is lower than 14%. Other boards in the same thickness group
achieved more than 14% thickness swelling, between 16% to 28.5%. After that, for thickness
group 20 mm, only board 0SD:100CF achieved 12% thickness swelling which is equal to
allowable thickness swelling of 12%. Meanwhile, other boards in the same thickness group
achieved more than 12% thickness swelling, which are between 14.7% to 25.8%. Lastly,
for thickness group 32 mm, all boards achieved more than allowable thickness swelling,
ranging from 12% to 26.5%. From Figure 13, it is concluded that the greater the content
of coconut fibre in hybrid fibre particleboard, the lower the swelling in thickness for all
boards in all thickness group.
The water absorption for all boards in all thickness group range between 37.6% to
56%. Whereas, the lowest values obtained by board 0SD:100CF in group thickness 20 mm
and the highest values obtained by board 50SD:50CF in group thickness 32 mm. For
thickness group 16 mm, as the content of coconut fibre increased in proportion, the water
absorption decreased, however, as the coconut fibre replaced 70% to 100% of sawdust
in proportion, the water absorption slightly increased. For thickness group 20 mm, as
Buildings 2021, 11, 256 18 of 24

the content of coconut fibre increased in proportion, the water absorption decreased. For
thickness group 32 mm, as the content of coconut fibre increased in proportion, the water
absorption also increased. Therefore, the content of coconut fibre in proportion of board
might have affected the physical changes of boards.

3.2. Mechanical Performance of Particleboards after Strength Test

3.2.1. Modulus Elasticity (MOE)
Figure 14 presents a curve of load versus deflection of test pieces for board 100SD:0CF
in thickness group 16 mm and plotted during the determination of modulus of elasticity in
bending and of bending strength using a universal testing machine (UTM). Two (2) board
samples with two (2) test pieces in transverse and longitudinal section each are tested.
The maximum loads for test piece of board sample no 1 in transverse and longitudinal
Buildings 2021,section areREVIEW
11, x FOR PEER 0.4083 kN and 0.5203 kN, respectively, with differences of 21%, and deflection
19 of 26

is 2.5 mm at the centre of both test pieces. Meanwhile, for the test piece of board no 2, in
transverse and longitudinal section, such loads are 0.4938 kN and 0.6947 kN, respectively,
thickness group of 16 mm and the highest maximum load was achieved by board of
with difference of 29%
70SD:30CF and deflection
in thickness group of 32 is
mm.3.67 mm
In the to 3.75
thickness group mm
of 16at
mm,the
thecentre
highest of test piece.
Therefore, on maximumaverage,loadtheofmaximum loadbyonboard
802 N was achieved board 100SD:0CF
0SD:100CF, followedwith thickness
by 30SD:70CF with group 16 mm
maximum load of 775 N and 70SD:30CF, 100SD:0CF, and 50SD:50CF with maximum loads
is 0.5293 kN. of 560 N, 408 N, and 390 N, respectively.

Figure 14. Load Against Deflection in Bending Test for Board 100SD:0CF in Thickness Group 16 mm.
Figure 14. Load Against Deflection in Bending Test for Board 100SD:0CF in Thickness Group 16 mm.

According to Figure 15, the maximum load ranging from the lowest of 390 N to
the highest of 1911 N. The lowest maximum load was achieved by board 50SD:50CF in
thickness group of 16 mm and the highest maximum load was achieved by board of
70SD:30CF in thickness group of 32 mm. In the thickness group of 16 mm, the highest
maximum load of 802 N was achieved by board 0SD:100CF, followed by 30SD:70CF with
maximum load of 775 N and 70SD:30CF, 100SD:0CF, and 50SD:50CF with maximum loads
of 560 N, 408 N, and 390 N, respectively.
On other hand, for boards in thickness group of 20 mm, the maximum load increased
as the proportion of coconut fibre increased, whereas board 100SD:0CF with 983 N maxi-
mum load, 70SD:30CF with maximum load of 1025 N, board 50SD:50CF with maximum
load of 1078 N, board 30SD:70CF with maximum load of 1356 N, and 0SD:100CF with
1298 N maximum load. After that, all boards in thickness group of 32 mm achieved maxi-
mum load over 1230 N before failure. Board 100SD:0CF achieved 1230 N maximum load,
board 70SD:30CF achieved 1410 N maximum load, while the maximum load for board
30SD:70CF with 1911 N declined to 1750 N by board 0SD:100CF.
The trend of maximum load achieved before failure for boards in thickness group
Figure 15. Mechanical Performances on Bending Strength of Particleboards (Modulus of Elasticity).
of 20 mm and 32 mm almost the same whereas the sawdust proportion decreased and
replaced by coconut fibre at 30% to 70% the maximum load increased but decreased
Buildings 2021, 11, 256 19 of 24

when the coconut fibre proportion increased by replacing sawdust at 100%. However, the
trend for the thickness group of 16 mm is different because, as the sawdust proportion
decreased and was replaced by coconut fibre 30–50%, the maximum load decreased and
increased again as the coconut fibre replaced sawdust at 70% and 100%. Therefore, it can
be concluded that boards with 70% coconut fibre replacing sawdust in proportion with
increasing thickness can achieved highest maximum loads before failure.
Figure 14. Load Against Deflection in Bending Test for Board 100SD:0CF in Thickness Group 16 mm.

Figure 15. Mechanical Performances on Bending Strength of Particleboards (Modulus of Elasticity).

Figure 15. Mechanical Performances on Bending Strength of Particleboards (Modulus of Elasticity).

As for modulus of elasticity (MOE), the bending strength of hybrid fibre-particleboards

will be compared between obtained values and calculated values. Firstly, for boards in
thickness group of 16 mm, the MOE increased as the proportion of sawdust decreased, with
the coconut fibre replacing sawdust for 30% and 50%, but decreased as the proportion of
coconut fibre was 70% and 100% for obtained values. However, the trend is reversed for cal-
culated values. For the obtained value, MOE for board 100SD:0CF is 1240 N/mm2 while the
calculated value is 1779.33 N/mm2 . Therefore, the differences between obtained and calcu-
lated values is 30%. For board 70SD:30CF the MOE obtained value is 1461 N/mm2 which
is 16% lower than calculated value of 1730.92 N/mm2 , board 50SD:50CF the MOE obtained
value is 1573 N/mm2 which is 9.5% higher than the calculated value of 1423.33 N/mm2 .
Meanwhile, for board 30SD:70CF and 0SD:100CF, the MOE obtained values are 1508 MPa
and 1094 MPa, which are 10.5% and 3.4% lower than calculated values of 1685.38 N/mm2
and 1133.45 N/mm2 , respectively. All boards in this thickness group do not meet the
requirement of 1950 N/mm2 for Type P3 particleboards use in humid condition for both
obtained and calculated values.
Secondly, for boards in thickness of 20 mm the MOE calculated value is decreased as
the sawdust proportion is decreased, but the MOE obtained value slightly increased when
sawdust proportion decreased from 100% to 70% however when as the coconut fibre propor-
tion increased from 50% to 70% the obtained value decreased and increased back when the
sawdust proportion reduced and replaced by 100% coconut fibre. As a comparison between
obtained values to calculated values of MOE, board 100SD:0CF with obtained value of
2052 N/mm2 is 6.4% lower than the calculated value of 2193.34 N/mm2 , whereas both val-
ues meet the requirement of 1850 N/mm2 . For board 70SD:30CF, the MOE obtained value
is 2434 N/mm2 , which is 12% higher than calculated value of 2140.28 N/mm2 and both
passed the requirement. For board 50SD:50CF, the MOE obtained value is 1741 N/mm2 ,
which is 12.8% lower than calculated value of 1995.98 N/mm2 , where only the calculated
value passed the requirement. Meanwhile, for board 30SD:70CF and 0SD:100CF, the MOE
obtained values are 1399 N/mm2 and 1510 N/mm2 , which are 14.2% and 0.5% lower than
calculated values of 1707.88 N/mm2 and 1517.65 N/mm2 , respectively.
Buildings 2021, 11, 256 20 of 24

Lastly, for boards in thickness group of 32 mm, the MOE decreased as the proportion
of sawdust decreased for both obtained values and calculated values. For obtained value,
board 100SD:0CF obtained value is 639 N/mm2 while calculated value is 821.36 N/mm2
with differences of 22%. For board 70SD:30CF the MOE obtained value is 513.8 N/mm2
which is 25% lower than calculated value of 688.11 N/mm2 . Meanwhile, for board
30SD:70CF and 0SD:100CF, the MOE obtained values are 374.4 N/mm2 and 93.730 N/mm2 ,
which are 40% and 67% lower than calculated values of 624.37 N/mm2 and 283.86 N/mm2 ,
respectively. All boards do not pass the requirement of 1700 N/mm2 for both obtained and
calculated values.

3.2.2. Modulus of Rupture (MOR)

Buildings 2021, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 21 of 26
Figure 16 shows that for board in thickness group 16 mm where the Modulus of Rup-
ture (MOR) decreased as the sawdust proportion decreased from 100SD:0CF to 70SD:30CF
which is 11.87 N/mm 2 and
respectively. All boards
10.01doN/mm 2 respectively.
not pass the requirement of 1700 N/mm2 for both
However, when obtained
the and
sawdust pro-
calculated values.
portion decreased from 50SD:50CF to 70SD:30CF, the MOR increased to 10.47 N/mm2
and 13.48 N/mm 2 , Modulus
3.2.2. respectively,
of Ruptureand (MOR) dropped again when sawdust was replaced with
100% coconut fibreFigurein board16 shows that for board with
0SD:100CF in thickness
a value group of
16 mm12.79whereN/mm 2 . All
the Modulus of boards in
Rupture (MOR) decreased as the sawdust proportion decreased from2 100SD:0CF to
thickness group70SD:30CF
16 mm which do not passN/mm
is 11.87 the2 requirement
and 10.01 N/mm2 of 14 N/mm
respectively. . For
However, boards
when the in thick-
ness group 20 mm,
sawdustall boards
proportion pass from
decreased the50SD:50CF
requirement of 12
to 70SD:30CF, N/mm
the MOR 2 . Namely,
increased to 10.47 boards
N/mm2 and 13.48 N/mm2, respectively, and dropped again when sawdust was replaced
100SD:0CF, 70SD:30CF, 50SD:50CF, 30SD:70CF, and 0SD:100CF obtained the MOR value of
with 100% coconut fibre in board 0SD:100CF with a value of 12.79 N/mm2. All boards in
14.33 N/mm2 , 14.04 N/mm
thickness
2 14.76 N/mm2 , 15.05 N/mm2 , and
group 16, mm do not pass the requirement of 14 N/mm2. For 17.8
boardsN/mm 2 , respectively,
in thickness
group 20 mm, all boards pass the requirement of 12 N/mm 2. Namely, boards 100SD:0CF,
whereas the increasing the coconut fibre proportion the highest MOR obtained. Lastly, for
70SD:30CF, 50SD:50CF, 30SD:70CF, and 0SD:100CF obtained the MOR value of 14.33
boards in thickness
N/mmgroup 32 mm,
2, 14.04 N/mm 2, 14.76 all
N/mmboards do not
2, 15.05 N/mm 2, andpass the requirement
17.8 N/mm of 12 N/mm2 .
2, respectively, whereas

Namely, board the100SD:0CF,

increasing the 70SD:30CF, 30SD:70CF,
coconut fibre proportion the highest and
MOR0SD:100CF
obtained. Lastly, obtained
for boards the MOR
in thickness
2 , 7.57group 32 mm,2 all boards do not pass the requirement of 122N/mm2. Namely,
2 , and
value of 7.45 N/mm N/mm , 7.56 N/mm 8.49 N/mm
board 100SD:0CF, 70SD:30CF, 30SD:70CF, and 0SD:100CF obtained the MOR value of 7.45
, respectively, whereas
increasing the coconut
N/mm2, 7.57 fibre
N/mm proportion,
2, 7.56 N/mm2, and the8.49
highest
N/mm2, MOR waswhereas
respectively, obtained. Therefore,
increasing the only
coconut fibre proportion, the
boards in thickness group 20 mm performed as Type P3. highest MOR was obtained. Therefore, only boards in
thickness group 20 mm performed as Type P3.

Figure 16. Mechanical Performances on the Bending Strength of Particleboards (Modulus of Rupture).
Figure 16. Mechanical Performances on the Bending Strength of Particleboards (Modulus of Rupture).
3.2.3. Internal Bonding
Table 6 show the results on performance of internal bonding after failure. Only test
3.2.3. Internal Bonding
pieces from boards in thickness groups 16 mm and 20 mm are tested in comparison
Table 6 show the results
because, in terms on performance
of physical propertiesofandinternal bonding
mechanical after
performance on failure.
bending Only test
strength,
pieces from boards only boardsgroups
in thickness in thickness
16 20
mm mmandmeet20 most
mm requirements
are tested for in
particleboard
comparison in because,
Type P3. Each test piece is randomly chosen from the sample in each thickness group and
in terms of physical properties
summarised and
to determine the mechanical performance
mean value of internal bonding. on bending strength, only
boards in thickness 20 mm meet most requirements for particleboard in Type P3. Each test
piece is randomly chosen from the sample in each thickness group and summarised to
determine the mean value of internal bonding.
Buildings 2021, 11, 256 21 of 24

Table 6. Results on Internal Bonding of Boards.

Proportion Area, a × b Internal Bonding,

Group Width, a (mm) Length, b (mm) F max (kN)
SD:CF (mm2 ) N/mm2 > 0.35 (P3)
100SD-T16(4(1)) 50.16 50.93 2554.65 2.47 0.97
100SD-T16(4(1)) 52.8 50.91 2688.05 2.05 0.76
100SD:0CF-T16 100SD-T16(4(1)) 49.59 50.94 2526.11 1.50 0.59
100SD-T16(4(1)) 50.27 50.85 2556.23 1.38 0.54
Average 2581.26 1.85 0.72
70SD-T16(3(1)) 50.38 50.16 2527.06 1.41 0.56
70SD-T16(3(3)) 51.98 50.5 2624.99 1.48 0.57
70SD:30CF-T16 70SD-T16(5(1)) 51.43 50.5 2597.22 1.18 0.46
70SD-T16(5(3)) 53.68 50.32 2701.18 1.36 0.50
Average 2612.61 1.36 0.52
30SD-T16(1(1)) 50.21 50.99 2560.21 1.52 0.60
30SD-T16(1(3)) 50.88 51.04 2596.92 1.91 0.74
30SD:70CF-T16 30SD-T16(6(1)) 50.03 51 2551.53 2.06 0.81
30SD-T16(6(3)) 50.95 49.65 2529.67 1.55 0.61
Average 2559.58 1.76 0.69
0SD-T16(2(1)) 51.11 50.66 2589.23 2.11 0.82
0SD-T16(2(3)) 50.26 50.79 2552.71 1.96 0.77
0SD:100CF-T16 0SD-T16(6(1)) 50.52 50.75 2563.89 1.65 0.64
0SD-T16(6(3)) 50.12 50.81 2546.60 1.69 0.66
Average 2563.11 1.85 0.72
100SD-T20(6(1)) 54.29 55.21 2997.35 2.37 0.79
100SD-T20(6(3)) 52.56 54.49 2863.99 2.97 1.04
100SD:0CF-T20 100SD-T20(5(2)) 48.43 53.39 2585.68 2.45 0.95
100SD-T20(5(4)) 53.25 49.37 2628.95 0.93 0.35
Average 2768.99 2.18 0.78
70SD-T20(3(1)) 51 50.23 2561.73 1.55 0.61
70SD-T20(3(3)) 50.15 50.68 2541.60 1.95 0.77
70SD:30CF-T20 70SD-T20(2(1)) 50.14 50.89 2551.62 2.41 0.94
70SD-T20(2(3)) 47.86 50.81 2431.77 0.87 0.36
Average 2521.68 2.18 0.67
50SD-T20(3(1)) 50.55 50.96 2576.03 1.69 0.66
50SD-T20(3(3)) 50.13 50.75 2544.10 1.77 0.70
50SD:50CF-T20 50SD-T20(2(1)) 52.57 50.79 2670.03 2.32 0.87
50SD-T20(2(3)) 48.22 50.86 2452.47 1.58 0.64
Average 2560.66 1.84 0.72
30SD-T20(1(1)) 51.69 51.84 2679.61 2.77 1.03
30SD-T20(1(3)) 51.93 50.9 2643.24 2.14 0.81
30SD:70CF-T20 30SD-T20(3(1)) 51.33 51.57 2647.09 1.51 0.57
30SD-T20(3(3)) 50.43 51.51 2597.65 1.57 0.60
Average 2641.90 2.00 0.75
0SD-T20(5(3)) 53.03 54.09 2868.39 2.40 0.84
0SD-T20(5(4)) 49.1 51.09 2508.52 2.47 0.98
0SD-T20(4(3)) 53.29 49.65 2645.85 2.84 1.07
0SD:100CF-T20
0SD-T20(4(5)) 52.99 48.05 2546.17 2.72 1.07
0SD-T20(4(2)) 54.97 47.57 2614.92 3.79 1.45
Average 2636.77 2.84 1.08
Buildings 2021, 11,
Buildings 2021, 11, 256
x FOR PEER REVIEW 22
23 of
of 24
26

Figure 17 shows the crack of test pieces after failure for tensile strength (internal
bonding).
bonding). All All the
the cracks
cracks occurred
occurred in the middle cross-section of test pieces. pieces. The results
obtained must must be be correlated
correlatedto tothe
theoccurrence
occurrenceofofcrack.
crack.IfIfthe
the crack
crack is is near
near to to
thethe glueline
glueline or
steel
or
Buildings 2021, x plate,
11,steel the
FOR plate,
PEER result
the
REVIEW for that
result for test
thatpiece will bewill
test piece a rejection in orderintoorder
be a rejection maintain the accuracy
to maintain the
23 of 26

of results of
accuracy to results
be analysed.
to be analysed.
Figure 17 shows the crack of test pieces after failure for tensile strength (internal
bonding). All the cracks occurred in the middle cross-section of test pieces. The results
obtained must be correlated to the occurrence of crack. If the crack is near to the glueline
or steel plate, the result for that test piece will be a rejection in order to maintain the
accuracy of results to be analysed.

Figure 17. The crack of test pieces after failure for tensile strength.

Figure 18 18shows
shows the
Figure 17. tensile
the
The ofstrength
tensile
crack pieces perpendicular
teststrength after perpendicular to strength.
failure for tensile thetoplane of the board
the plane of theorboard
internalor
bonding. The required values for internal bonding for
internal bonding. The required values for internal bonding for thickness group 16 thickness group 16 mm and 20 mmmm
2 and Figure 18 shows 2the tensile strength perpendicular to the plane of the board or
are 0.45
and 20 mm N/mm are 0.45 0.40 N/mm
N/mm 2 and 0.40 respectively.
N/mm For boardsFor
2 respectively. in thickness
boards in group
thicknessof 16 mm,
internal bonding. The required 2 values for internal bonding for thickness group 16group
mm
board
of 100SD:0CF
16 mm, boardand obtained
100SD:0CF 0.54
20 mm are 0.45obtainedN/mm
N/mm which
0.540.40
2 and N/mm N/mm is 16.5% ishigher
2 2which
respectively.16.5% than
higher
For boards required. Board
than required.
in thickness group
70SD:30CF the internal bonding slightlyslightly
lower than board 2 100SD:0CF which 2
Board 70SD:30CF of 16
themm, board 100SD:0CF
internal bonding obtained 0.54
lower N/mmthan which
board is 16.5% higheristhan
100SD:0CF 0.52required.
which N/mm
is 0.52,
13.7% 2lower Board
than 0.4570SD:30CF
N/mm 2
the internal
, and the bonding
internal slightly
bondinglower than board
increased 100SD:0CF
as theas which
coconut is 0.52
fibre
N/mm , 13.7% lower than 0.45 N/mm 2, and the internal bonding increased the coconut
N/mm2, 13.7% lower than 0.45 N/mm2, and the internal bonding increased as the coconut
proportion increased
fibre proportionfibre in
increased board 30SD:70CF
in board 30SD:70CF and 0SD:100CF,
and 0SD:100CF, where the
where obtained
the values are
2 and 0.72 proportion increased in board 30SD:70CF
2 respectively. and 0SD:100CF, where theobtained values
obtained values
0.69 N/mm
are 0.69 N/mm areand2 N/mm
0.690.72
N/mm N/mm
2 and 0.722 respectively. All boards
N/mm2 respectively.All boardsin thickness group
in thickness
All boards 16
in thicknessgroupmm surpass
group 1616mm mm
the requirement
surpass for Type
surpass
the requirement P3.Type P3.
thefor
requirement for Type P3.

Figure 18.Figure 18. Tensile

Tensile StrengthStrength Perpendicularto
Perpendicular tothe
the Plane
Planeofof
thethe
Board (Internal
Board Bonding).
(Internal Bonding).

For boards in thickness 20 mm, the trendline for internal bonding was the same as
in boards in thickness group 16 mm, whereas for board 100SD:0CF, the value obtained is
0.78 N/mm2 , but this value decreases to 0.67 N/mm2 when 30% coconut fibre is added
Figure 18. in board
Tensile 70SD:30CF.
Strength However,
Perpendicular asPlane
to the the proportion
of the Board of coconut
(Internal fibre increased from 50%,
Bonding).
Buildings 2021, 11, 256 23 of 24

70%, and 100% in board 50SD:50CF, 30SD:70CF, and 0SD:100CF, the internal bonding also
increased with values of 0.72 N/mm2 , 0.75 N/mm2 , and 1.08 N/mm2 , respectively. All
boards in thickness group 20 mm surpass the requirement of 0.40 N/mm2 .

4. Conclusions
As a conclusion, the objective of this paper, to evaluate the physical properties and
mechanical performances of hybrid particleboards made up of agricultural wastes, i.e.,
sawdust and coconut fibre, has been achieved. All 15 types of hybrid particleboard have
been tested, whereby the optimum composition of sawdust to coconut fibre and its suitable
thickness have also been identified. Technically, the higher the composition of coconut
fibre in the mixed design, the better the physical and mechanical performance, which can
be proven by boards with thickness of 20 mm, where the thickness swelling and water
absorption percentage decreased as the composition of coconut fibre is more than the
composition of sawdust particle in the mixed design. Furthermore, for the modulus of
rupture on bending for the board in the thickness group of 20 mm, it increased as the
composition of coconut fibre is higher than the composition of sawdust particles, even
though the modulus of elasticity showed an inverted trend where the value surpassed the
requirement for boards with less composition of coconut fibre than the sawdust particle.
In addition, tensile strength or internal bonding for boards with a higher composition of
coconut fibre than sawdust particle has a higher value, meeting the requirements. Therefore,
the optimum composition of sawdust to coconut fibre and suitable thickness show that
the best result in both physical properties and mechanical performances is 0SD:100CF (0%
sawdust to 100% coconut fibre) in the thickness group of 20 mm. In addition, another
interesting finding is that, so long as the composition of sawdust is not exceeding 50%
in the mixed design, the physical properties and mechanical performances still meet the
standard’s requirement. With the above significant empirical findings using the robust
methodology (i.e., lab testing), this hybrid material, valorising green, recyclable agriculture
wastes, offers invaluable insights and promotes sustainability for building construction
and architectural industries. However, the empirical results reported herein should be
considered in the light of some limitations. In correspondence to the British Standard
used for this study, more physical and mechanical performances tests can be executed to
produce a particleboard with good or even greater qualities other than Type P3. Last but
not least, the findings can be substantiated and extended in future research by considering
a bigger sample size of particleboards, incorporating thermal and insulation variables too,
in order to provide more holistic, comprehensive results.

Author Contributions: All authors contributed to the manuscript. Conceptualization, E.A., N.H.A.S.L.
and N.M.Z.N.S.; D.N.b.T. and E.A. collected and evaluated, in a coordinated way, all the publications
mentioned in the paper; P.C.L., G.H.T.L. and M.H.A. contributed to visualization & editing. With
this material, D.N.b.T. wrote a preliminary version of the article that was further enriched with
suggestions and contributions by the rest of the authors. All authors have read and agreed to the
published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research publication was funded by UTM Transdisciplinary Research Grant No.
Q.J130000.3551.06G64 and Q.J130000.3552.07G55.
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: Not applicable.
Acknowledgments: The authors wish to deliver appreciation to UTM Transdisciplinary Research
Grant TDR 47 for the funding, Heveaboard Sdn Bhd for the courtesy providing sawdust and resin
(UF) as well as to University Tun Hussein Onn for allowing fabrication work of particleboard in
Timber Fabrication Laboratory, Faculty of Civil Engineering and Built Environment.
Buildings 2021, 11, 256 24 of 24

Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design
of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript, or
in the decision to publish the results.

References
1. Jonsson, R.; Hurmekoski, E.; Hetemäki, L.; Prestemon, J. What Is the Current State of Forest Product Markets and How Will They
Develop in the Future? In Towards a Sustainable European Forest-based Bioeconomy—Assessment and the way forward; European Forest
Institute: Joensuu, Finland, 2017; pp. 126–131. Available online: https://www.efi.int/sites/default/files/files/publication-bank/
2018/efi_wsctu8_2017.pdf (accessed on 26 May 2021).
2. Stark, N.M.; Cai, Z.; Carll, C. Chapter 11—Wood-Based Composite Materials Panel Products, Glued-Laminated Timber, Structural
Materials. In Wood Handbook, Wood as an Engineering Material; General Technical Report FPL-GTR-282; Department of Agriculture,
Forest Service, Forest Products Laboratory: Madison, WI, USA, 2021; pp. 1–28.
3. Cai, Z.; Robert, J.R. CHAPTER 12: Mechanical Properties of Wood-Based Composite Materials, General Technical Report FPL–GTR–190;
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Forest Products Laboratory: Madison, WI, USA, 2021; pp. 1–12.
4. Saeli, M.; Piccirillo, C.; Tobaldi, D.M.; Binions, R.; Castro, P.M.; Pullar, R.C. A sustainable replacement for TiO2 in photocatalyst
construction materials: Hydroxyapatite-based photocatalytic additives, made from the valorisation of food wastes of marine
origin. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 193, 115–127. [CrossRef]
5. Garcia-Garcia, G.; Stone, J.; Rahimifard, S. Opportunities for waste valorisation in the food industry—A case study with four UK
food manufacturers. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 211, 1339–1356. [CrossRef]
6. McNutt, J.; He, Q. (Sophia) Spent coffee grounds: A review on current utilization. J. Ind. Eng. Chem. 2019, 71, 78–88. [CrossRef]
7. Abdullah, A.; Lee, C. Effect of Treatments on Properties of Cement-fiber Bricks Utilizing Rice Husk, Corncob and Coconut Coir.
Procedia Eng. 2017, 180, 1266–1273. [CrossRef]
8. Freire, A.L.F.; Júnior, C.P.D.A.; Rosa, M.D.F.; Neto, J.A.D.A.; De Figueirêdo, M.C.B. Environmental assessment of bioproducts in
development stage: The case of fiberboards made from coconut residues. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 153, 230–241. [CrossRef]
9. Adediran, A.A.; Olawale, O.; Ojediran, J.; Aladegboye, S.; Atoyebi, O.D.; Akinlabi, E.T.; Olayanju, A. Properties of agro-based
hybrid particleboards. Procedia Manuf. 2019, 35, 442–446. [CrossRef]
10. Discipline, W.T.; Luang, K. Particleboard from coir pith. Bangladesh J. Sci. Ind. Res. 2016, 51, 239–245.
11. Kadja, K.; Drovou, S.; Kassegne, K.A.; Pizzi, A.; Sanda, K.; Batako, A.D. Development and Investigation into Properties of
composite Particleboard of Iroko and African Locust Bean Pod. Procedia Manuf. 2019, 30, 188–193. [CrossRef]
12. El-Kassas, A.; Mourad, A.-H. Novel fibers preparation technique for manufacturing of rice straw based fiberboards and their
characterization. Mater. Des. 2013, 50, 757–765. [CrossRef]
13. Akinyemi, A.B.; Afolayan, J.; Oluwatobi, E.O. Some properties of composite corn cob and sawdust particle boards. Constr. Build.
Mater. 2016, 127, 436–441. [CrossRef]
14. Paridah, M.; Juliana, A.H.; El-Shekeil, Y.; Jawaid, M.; Alothman, O.Y. Measurement of mechanical and physical properties of
particleboard by hybridization of kenaf with rubberwood particles. Measurement 2014, 56, 70–80. [CrossRef]
15. Wei, K.; Lv, C.; Chen, M.; Zhou, X.; Dai, Z.; Shen, D. Development and performance evaluation of a new thermal insulation
material from rice straw using high frequency hot-pressing. Energy Build. 2015, 87, 116–122. [CrossRef]
16. Alam, M.; Sapuan, S.; Mansor, M. Design Characteristics, Codes and Standards of Natural Fibre Composites; Elsevier Ltd.: Amsterdam,
The Netherlands, 2017; pp. 511–528.
17. Marimuthu, K.P.; Kumar, S.M.; Kumar, V.R.; Govindaraju, H. Characterization of Mechanical Properties of Epoxy Reinforced
with Glass Fiber and Coconut Fiber. Mater. Today Proc. 2019, 16, 661–667. [CrossRef]
18. Danso, H. Properties of Coconut, Oil Palm and Bagasse Fibres: As Potential Building Materials. Procedia Eng. 2017, 200, 1–9.
[CrossRef]
19. Ngadiman, N.; Kaamin, M.; Kadir, A.A.; Sahat, S.; Zaini, A.; Zentan, S.R.N.; Ahmad, N.A.; Amran, W.H.A.W. Panel Board from
Coconut Fibre and Pet Bottle. E3S Web Conf. 2018, 34, 01014. [CrossRef]
20. Azman, M.N.; Majid, T.A.; Ahamad, M.S.; Hanafi, M.H. A Study on the Trend of The Use of Ibs Components and the Setting Up
of Ibs Manufacturing Factories in the Malaysian Construction Industry. Malays. Constr. Res. J. 2010, 9, 18–30.
21. Merkus, H.G. Sieves and Sieving. In Particle Size Measurements; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2009; Volume 17, pp.
219–240.
22. Cosereanu, C.; Cerbu, C. Rape/wood particleboard. BioResources 2019, 14, 2903–2918.
23. BS EN 312. BS EN 312:2010 BSI Standards Publication Particleboards—Specifications; British Standard: London, UK, 2010.
24. British Standard. Wood-Based Panels—Determination of Density; British Standard: London, UK, 1993; pp. 1–12.
25. EN-317. European Committee for Standardization. Particleboards and fiberboards—Determination of Swelling in Thick-Ness after Immersion
in Water; British Standard: London, UK, 1993.
26. CEN. EN 310 Wood-Based Panels—Determination of Modulus of Elasticity in Bending and of Bending Strength; CEN: Brussels,
Belgium, 1996.
27. European Committee for Standardization. Particleboards and Fiberboards—Determination of Tensile Strength Perpendicular to the Plane
of Board; EN319; European Committee for Standardization: Brussels, Belgium, 1993.