Abstract
The wear resistance and Janka hardness of five United States hardwood species were evaluated for potential use in bridge decking and truck flooring. The species tested include ash (Fraxinus sp.), hickory (Carya sp.), red oak (Quercus sp.), sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua), and white oak (Quercus sp.). The specimens were prepared with the sizes of 1 by 2 by 4 inches (2.54 by 5.08 by 10.16cm) for abrasion test and 1 by 2 by 6 inches (2.54 by 5.08 by 15.24 cm) for Janka hardness testing. The specimens were cut from 30 individual parent boards of random width with clear sections for each species. The abrasion and Janka hardness tests were performed according to the American Society of Testing and Materials standards. All wear and hardness data were statistically analyzed by 1-way analysis of variance. The results of this study demonstrated that sweetgum with the lowest density had the greatest amount of thicknesses loss and thus lowest wear resistance. White oak was found to have the least thicknesses loss, thus highest wear resistance among the hardwood species tested. Hickory, with the highest density, had the highest hardness among the hardwood species tested, but it had relatively lower wear resistance comparing to ash, red oak, and white oak.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 8-13 |
| Number of pages | 6 |
| Journal | Forest Products Journal |
| Volume | 72 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - 2022 |
Bibliographical note
Funding Information:Acknowledgments This publication is a contribution of the Forest and Wildlife Research Center, Mississippi State University. This study was conducted through a cooperative research agreement (FS 20-JV-11111133-032) between Mississippi State University and USDA Forest Service, Forest Products Laboratory, and partially funded by USDA Forest Service, Forest Products Laboratory. The authors also acknowledge the US Endowment for Forests and Communities for its contributions to this research.
Funding Information:
This publication is a contribution of the Forest and Wildlife Research Center, Mississippi State University. This study was conducted through a cooperative research agreement (FS 20-JV-11111133-032) between Mississippi State University and USDA Forest Service, Forest Products Laboratory, and partially funded by USDA Forest Service, Forest Products Laboratory. The authors also acknowledge the US Endowment for Forests and Communities for its contributions to this research.
Publisher Copyright:
© Forest Products Society 2022.