European Journal of Wood and Wood Products

, Volume 77, Issue 2, pp 293–299 | Cite as

Revealing the impacts of recycled urea–formaldehyde wastes on the physical–mechanical properties of MDF

  • Mohesn Khonakdar Dazmiri
  • Mohammad Valizadeh Kiamahalleh
  • Meisam Valizadeh KiamahallehEmail author
  • Hamid Reza Mansouri
  • Vahid Moazami


Recycling of the urea–formaldehyde (UF) products mainly obtained from adhesive wastes of wood industries is vital and requires a high level of attention due to the environmental and human health impacts of formaldehyde and other chemicals. In this study, the complete polymerized resin, as undesired waste product of Chassbsaz company, has been recycled and reused in the manufacturing process of medium density fiberboards (MDF). The results demonstrated that by adding recycled polymerized powder in sub-micron size to urea–formaldehyde control resin and replacing 1 wt% of the 55% solid content resin, the curing time of the resin significantly decreased. Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR) demonstrated the chemical stability of the UF resins after adding 1 wt% recycled polymerized resin. In addition, there were substantial improvements in physical–mechanical properties [i.e., modulus of elasticity (MOE), modulus of rupture (MOR), internal bond (IB) strength and thickness swelling (TS)] of the newly manufactured board compared to that of the control board. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was employed to study the dependency and significance of the physical–mechanical properties of the MDF on the concentration of the recycled polymer. Moreover, the production capacity was expected to significantly increase as the curing time decreased while maintaining the outstanding mechanical characteristics of the boards.



This work was financially supported by Arian Saeed Industrial Group and the authors are thankful to Mr. Ali Saeedi, the head of this industrial group for his invaluable support. Further, special gratitude to all employees in Chassbsaz and Arian Sina companies for their support in this research.


  1. Ashori A, Nourbakhsh A (2009) Effects of nanoclay as a reinforcement filler on the physical and mechanical properties of wood-based composite. J Compos Mater 43(18):1869–1875CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. ASTM D1081-60 (1968) Standard method of test for evaluating pressure sealing properties of rubber and rubber-like materials. Am Soc Test Mater:1–3Google Scholar
  3. Ayrilmis N (2012) Enhancement of dimensional stability and mechanical properties of light MDF by adding melamine resin impregnated paper waste. Int J Adhes Adhes 33:45–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bezerra MA, Santelli RE, Oliveira EP, Villar LS, Escaleira LA (2008) Response surface methodology (RSM) as a tool for optimization in analytical chemistry. Talanta 76(5):965–977CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Boran S, Usta M, Gümüşkaya E (2011) Decreasing formaldehyde emission from medium density fiberboard panels produced by adding different amine compounds to urea formaldehyde resin. Int J Adhes Adhes 31(7):674–678CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Conner AH (1996) Urea–formaldehyde adhesive resins. Polym Mater Encycl 11:8496–8501Google Scholar
  7. Costa N, Pereira J, Martins J, Ferra J, Cruz P, Magalhães F, Mendes A, Carvalho L (2012) Alternative to latent catalysts for curing UF resins used in the production of low formaldehyde emission wood-based panels. Int J Adhes Adhes 33:56–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cyr P-L, Riedl B, Wang X-M (2008) Investigation of urea-melamine-formaldehyde (UMF) resin penetration in medium-density fiberboard (MDF) by high resolution confocal laser scanning microscopy. Eur J Wood Prod 66(2):129–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Derkyi N, Darkwa N, Yartey J (2008) Effect of cassava flour as urea formaldehyde adhesive extender on the bonding strength of plywood. Ghana J For 23(24):25–34Google Scholar
  10. Dunky M (1998) Urea–formaldehyde (UF) adhesive resins for wood. Int J Adhes Adhes 18(2):95–107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dupre FC, Foucht ME, Freese WP, Gabrielson KD, Gapud BD, Ingram WH, McVay TM, Rediger RA, Shoemake KA, Tutin KK (2000) Cyclic urea–formaldehyde prepolymer for use in phenol–formaldehyde and melamine–formaldehyde resin-based binders. US Patent 6,114,491Google Scholar
  12. EN 310 (1993) Wood-based panels: determination of modulus of elasticity in bending and of bending strength. CEN European Committee for Standardization, European UnionGoogle Scholar
  13. EN 316 (1999) Wood fibreboards. Definition, classification and symbols. CEN European Committee for Standardization, European UnionGoogle Scholar
  14. EN 317 (1993) Particleboards and fibreboards: determination of swelling in thickness after immersion in water. CEN European Committee for Standardization, European UnionGoogle Scholar
  15. EN 319 (1993) Particleboards and fiberboards, determination of tensile strength perpendicular to plane of the board. CEN European Committee for Standardization, European UnionGoogle Scholar
  16. EN 326 (1994) Wood-based panels, sampling and cutting of test pieces and inspection. CEN European Committee for Standardization, European UnionGoogle Scholar
  17. Finch C (1984) Wood adhesives: chemistry and technology. Pizzi A (ed) Marcel Dekkar, New York, 1983. Pp ix + 364, price SFr 174.00. ISBN 0814715799. Wiley Online LibraryGoogle Scholar
  18. Gadhave RV, Mahanwar PA, Gadekar PT (2017) Factor affecting gel time/process-ability of urea formaldehyde resin based wood adhesives. Open J Polym Chem 7(02):33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gan SN, Tan BY (2001) FTIR studies of the curing reactions of palm oil alkyd–melamine enamels. J Appl Polym Sci 80(12):2309–2315CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gao W, Du G, Ma H, Li J (2016) Dynamic mechanical analysis of urea formaldehyde resin modified by ammonium pentaborate as wood adhesive. Polym Comp 37(8):2404–2410CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ghafari R, DoostHosseini K, Abdulkhani A, Mirshokraie SA (2016) Replacing formaldehyde by furfural in urea formaldehyde resin: effect on formaldehyde emission and physical–mechanical properties of particleboards. Eur J Wood Prod 74(4):609–616CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Halvarsson S, Edlund H, Norgren M (2008) Properties of medium-density fibreboard (MDF) based on wheat straw and melamine modified urea formaldehyde (UMF) resin. Ind Crops Prod 28(1):37–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Jada SS (1988) The structure of urea–formaldehyde resins. J Appl Polym Sci 35(6):1573–1592CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Jang Y, Huang J, Li K (2011) A new formaldehyde-free wood adhesive from renewable materials. Int J Adhes Adhes 31(7):754–759CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kaboorani A, Riedl B (2011) Effects of adding nano-clay on performance of polyvinyl acetate (PVA) as a wood adhesive. Compos Part A Appl Sci Manuf 42:1031–1039CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kaboorani A, Riedl B, Blanchet P (2013) Ultrasonication technique: a method for dispersing nanoclay in wood adhesives. J Nanomater 3:1–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kumar A, Gupta A, Sharma K, Nasir M, Khan TA (2013) Influence of activated charcoal as filler on the properties of wood composites. Int J Adhes Adhes 46:34–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lee Y-K, Kim H-J (2013) Relationship between curing activation energy and free formaldehyde content in urea–formaldehyde resins. J Adhes Sci Technol 27(5–6):598–609CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lei H, Du G, Pizzi A, Celzard A (2008) Influence of nano-clay on urea formaldehyde resins for wood adhesives and its model. J Appl Polym Sci 109(4):2442–2451CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Maloney TM (1977) Modern particleboard and dry-process fiberboard manufacturing. Miller Freeman Publications, ‎San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  31. Motter WK, Daisy NK, Detlefsen WD (1997) Catalytic composition and method for curing urea–formaldehyde resin. US Patent 5:635,583Google Scholar
  32. Moubarik A, Mansouri HR, Pizzi A (2013) Improving UF particleboard adhesives water resistance by small albumin and sunflower oil additions. Eur J Wood Prod 71(2):277–279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Myers GE (1984) How mole ratio of UF resin affects formaldehyde emission and other properties: a literature critique. For Prod J 34(5):35–41Google Scholar
  34. Nuryawan A, Park B-D, Singh AP (2014) Comparison of thermal curing behavior of liquid and solid urea–formaldehyde resins with different formaldehyde/urea mole ratios. J Therm Anal Calorim 118(1):397–404CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Osemeahon S, Barminas J (2007) Study of some physical properties of urea formaldehyde and urea proparaldehyde copolymer composite for emulsion paint formulation. Int J Phys Sci 2:169–177Google Scholar
  36. Park B-D, Jeong H-W (2011) Hydrolytic stability and crystallinity of cured urea–formaldehyde resin adhesives with different formaldehyde/urea mole ratios. Int J Adhes Adhes 31(6):524–529CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Pizzi A (1994) Advanced wood adhesives technology. CRC Press, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
  38. Roffael E (2012) Influence of resin content and pulping temperature on the formaldehyde release from medium density fibreboards (MDF). Eur J Wood Prod 70(5):651–654CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Xian D (2012) Effect of nanoclay filler on wood adhesives and particle board properties. Thesis, University of British Columbia, VancouverGoogle Scholar
  40. Zhong R, Gu J, Gao Z, Tu D, Hu C (2017) Impacts of urea–formaldehyde resin residue on recycling and reconstitution of wood-based panels. Int J Adhes Adhes 78:60–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Research and Development DivisionChassbsaz CompanySariIran
  2. 2.Department of Process EngineeringInternational Maritime College OmanSoharOman
  3. 3.Department of Wood and Paper Science and TechnologyUniversity of ZabolZabolIran
  4. 4.Research and Development DivisionArian Sina CompanySariIran

Personalised recommendations