Mechanical properties of coppiced and non-coppiced Pterocarpus erinaceus boles and their industrial application

  • Charles Antwi-BoasiakoEmail author
  • Frederick Amin Anthonio
  • Kwasi Frimpong-Mensah
Original Paper


Rosewood (Pterocarpus erinaceus Poir.) is valued for flooring, ornaments, musical instruments and furniture-making due to its durability, strength, beauty and acoustic properties. It coppices easily which could boost its continual supply. Compression parallel to grain, Modulus of Elasticity (MOE) and Modulus of Rupture (MOR) within coppiced and non-coppiced boles were determined. These properties decreased along both types of boles. Strength values for the heartwood were also greater than those for the sapwood of each type of bole. MOE, MOR and compression for non-coppiced stems were greater than those from the coppiced stems. The differences were significant (p < 0.05). Mechanical properties from the coppiced and non-coppiced boles are comparable. Both have strength properties comparable with those of species widely used for railway sleepers, structural supports, flooring, veneer, furniture, cabinetry, truss and mine props. Therefore, coppiced wood could supplement non-coppiced wood for industrial applications which require strength.


Coppicing Wood density Mechanical property Rosewood Structural application 



We appreciate the staff of the Kumawu Forest District, Ashanti Region (Ghana) for the provision of wood samples. The authors also express their gratitude to the Forest Products, Trade and Marketing Division of the Forestry Research Institute of Ghana, CSIR, Fumesua, Kumasi for assisting in the assessment of the mechanical properties of the wood samples.


The Project was funded by the Authors.


  1. Abdul-Rahaman I, Kabanda J, Braima MM (2016) Desertification of the savanna: illega logging of rosewood, causes and effects on the people of Kabonwule, Northern Region. Saudi J Hum Soc Stud 1:48–54Google Scholar
  2. Ali CA (2011) Physical-mechanical properties and natural durability of lesser used wood species from Mozambique. Thesis (Ph.D.), Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, 60 ppGoogle Scholar
  3. Ali AC, Uetimane E Jr, Råberg U, Terziev N (2011) Comparative natural durability of five wood species from Mozambique. Int Biodeterior Biodegrad 65(6):768–776CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Alipon MA, Bondad EO (2011) Comparative strength and related properties of yemane (Gmelina arborea Roxb.) coppice and planted stand. Philipp J Sci 140(2):231–238Google Scholar
  5. Arunkumar AN, Joshi G (2014) Pterocarpus santalinus (Red Sanders) an endemic, endangered tree of India: current status, improvement and the future. J Trop For Environ 4(02):1–10Google Scholar
  6. Atar M, Ozcifci A, Altinok M, Celikel U (2009) Determination of diagonal compression and tension performances for case furniture corner joints constructed with wood biscuits. Mater Des 30:665–670CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bandoh WKN (2016) Tissue culture regeneration potential of African rosewood in Ghana: institutional variables and implications for sustainability. Masters Dissertation, Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology—Kumasi, p 103Google Scholar
  8. Bosu D (2013) Draft report on the dynamics of harvesting and trade in rosewood (Pterocarpus erinaceus) in Bole, Central, West and North Gonja Districts of the Northern Region, Ghana, 2013.3. National Academy of Sciences (NAS). Tropical legumes: Resources for the future. National Academy of Sciences, Washington, D.C; 1979Google Scholar
  9. BS 373 (1957): Methods of testing small clear specimens of timber. British Standard InstitutionGoogle Scholar
  10. Callister WD, Rethwisch GD (2012) Fundamentals of materials science and engineering: an integrated approach. Wiley, New York, p 910Google Scholar
  11. Coleman H (2014) Situation of global rosewood production and trade-ghana rosewood case study. Timber Industry Development Division, Forestry Commission, TakoradiGoogle Scholar
  12. Dickson WC (2000) Integrative plant anatomy. Academic Press, London. p, p 533Google Scholar
  13. Dinwoodie JM (2000) Timber: its nature and behaviour, 2nd edn. Taylor & Francis Group, London, p 272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dumenu WK, Bandoh WN (2014) Situational analysis of P. erinaceus (rosewood): evidence of unsustainable exploitation in Ghana? In: First national forestry conference 16–18 Sept 2014, Kumasi, GhanaGoogle Scholar
  15. Duvall CS (2008) Pterocarpus erinaceus Poir. In: Louppe D, Oteng-Amoako AA, Brink M (eds) PROTA (Plant Resources of Tropical Africa/Ressources végétales de l’Afrique tropicale), Wageningen, Netherlands. Accessed 29 Mar 2017Google Scholar
  16. Edwin P, Ozarska B (2015) Bending properties of hardwood timbers from secondary forest in Papua New Guinea. J Trop For Sci 27(4):456–461Google Scholar
  17. Forest Products Laboratory (1999) Wood handbook: wood as an engineering material. In: General technical report FPL–GTR–113, US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Madison, USAGoogle Scholar
  18. Fuller RJ, Warren MS (1993) Coppiced woodlands: their management for wildlife. Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Britain G (eds) 2nd edn. Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Monkstone House, City, Peterborough, p 34. ISBN 1 873701 32 2Google Scholar
  19. Gindl W, Teischinger A (2002) Axial compression strength of Norway spruce related to structural variability and lignin content. Compos A Appl Sci Manuf 33(12):1623–1628CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Green H (2007) Wood: craft, culture, history. Penguin, New York, p 464Google Scholar
  21. Haygreen JG, Bowyer JL (1996) Forest products and wood science. an introduction, 3rd edn. IOWA State University Press, Ames, p 484Google Scholar
  22. Hernandez ER (2007) Influence of accessory substances, wood density and interlocked grain on the compressive properties of hardwoods. Wood Sci Technol 41:249–265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hoare A (2015) Tackling illegal logging and the related trade: what progress and where next?. Chatham House, LondonGoogle Scholar
  24. Hytönen J, Kaunisto S (1999) Effect of fertilization on the biomass production of coppiced mixed birch and willow stands on a cut-away peatland. Biomass Bioenergy 17:455–469CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Izekor DN, Fuwape JA (2011) Variations in the anatomical characteristics of plantation grown Tectona grandis wood in Edo State, Nigeria. Arch Appl Sci Res 3(1):83–90Google Scholar
  26. Izekor DN, Fuwape JA, Oluyege AO (2010) Effects of density on variations in the mechanical properties of plantation grown Tectona grandis wood. Arch Appl Sci Res 2(6):113–120Google Scholar
  27. Kalpakjian S, Schmid S (2006) Manufacturing, engineering and technology SI, 6th edn. Digital Designs, New JerseyGoogle Scholar
  28. Kémeuzé VA (2008) Entandrophragma cylindricum (Sprague). In: Louppe D, Oteng-Amoako AA, Brink M (eds) PROTA (Plant Resources of Tropical Africa/Ressources végétales de l’Afrique tropicale). Wageningen, Netherlands. Accessed 16 Apr 2016
  29. Kiaei M, Samariha A (2011) Fiber dimensions, physical and mechanical properties of five important hardwood plants. Indian J Sci Technol 4(11):1460–1463Google Scholar
  30. Lantican CB (1976) Quality control should start in the woods. Asian Forest Industries Yearbook, pp 2324–7374Google Scholar
  31. Lemmens RHMJ (2008) Khaya ivorensis A. Chev. [Internet] Record from PROTA4U. In: Louppe D, Oteng-Amoako AA, Brink M (eds) PROTA (Plant Resources of Tropical Africa/Ressources végétales de l’Afrique tropicale), Wageningen, Netherlands. Accessed 18 Mar 2017
  32. Lima IL, Longui EL, Freitas MLM, Zanatto ACS, Zanata M (2014) Physical-mechanical and anatomical characterization in 26-year-old Eucalyptus resinifera wood. Floresta e Ambiente 21(1):91–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Meier E (2014) The wood database. Accessed 11 Oct 2016
  34. Miller RB (1999) Characteristics and availability of commercially important woods. Wood handbook: wood as an engineering material. Madison, WI: USDA Forest Service, Forest Products Laboratory. General technical report FPL; GTR-113, pp 1.1–1.34Google Scholar
  35. Orwa C, Mutua A, Kindt R, Jamnadass R, Anthony S (2009) Agroforesttree database: a tree reference and selection guide version 4.0. World Agroforestry Centre, Kenya. Accessed 21 Apr 2016
  36. Postell J (2012) Furniture design. Wiley, New York, p 416Google Scholar
  37. Ratanawilai T, Chumthong T, Kirdkong S (2006) An investigation on the mechanical properties of trunks of palm oil trees for the furniture industry. J Oil Palm Res (special issue-April 2006): 114–121Google Scholar
  38. Ribeiro RA, Ramos ACS, Filho JPDL, Lovato MB (2005) Genetic variation in remnant populations of Dalbergia nigra (Papilionoideae), an endangered tree from the Brazilian Atlantic forest. Ann Bot 95:1171–1177CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  39. Rivers S, Umney N (2007) Conservation of furniture. Routledge, London, p 840CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Rowell MR, Ibach ER, McSweeny J, Nilsson T (2009) Understanding decay resistance, dimensional stability and strength changes in heat-treated and acetylated wood. Wood Mater Sci Eng 4(1–2):14–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Schonau APG (1991) Growth yield and timber density of short rotation coppice stands of Eucalyptus grandis. S Afr For J 156:12–22Google Scholar
  42. Shrivastava MB (1997) Wood technology. Vikas Publishing House Pvt Ltd, New Delhi, p 181Google Scholar
  43. Smardzewski J, Majewski A (2013) Strength and durability of furniture drawers and doors. Mater Des 10(51):61–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Tankut N (2007) The effect of adhesive type and bond line thickness on the strength of mortise and tenon joints. Int J Adhes Adhes 27:493–498CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Timings RL (1991) Engineering materials, vol 1. Longmann Scientific and Technical Limited, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  46. Tsoumis G (1991) Science and technology of wood: structure, properties, utilization, vol 115. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  47. Unsal O, Ayrilmis N (2005) Variations in compression strength and surface roughness of heat-treated Turkish river red gum (Eucalyptus camaldulensis) wood. J Wood Sci 51:405–409CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Varty N (1998) Dalbergia nigra. In: IUCN 2010. IUCN red list of threatened species. Version 2010, 2 ppGoogle Scholar
  49. Whittock SP, Greaves BL, Apiolaza LA (2004) A cash flow model to compare coppice and genetically improved seedling options for Eucalyptus globulus pulpwood plantations. For Ecol Manag 191:267–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Wilcox W, Botsai EC, Kubel H (1991) Wood as a building material (a guide for designers and builders). Wiley, New York, p 61Google Scholar
  51. Zbonak A, Bush T, Grzeskowiak V (2007) Comparison of tree growth, wood density and anatomical properties between coppiced trees and parent crop of six Eucalyptus genotypes. In: IUFRO-improvement and culture of Eucalyptus, pp 1–10Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Northeast Forestry University and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Charles Antwi-Boasiako
    • 1
    Email author
  • Frederick Amin Anthonio
    • 1
  • Kwasi Frimpong-Mensah
    • 1
  1. 1.Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and TechnologyKumasiGhana

Personalised recommendations