Journal of Wood Science

, Volume 64, Issue 3, pp 279–286 | Cite as

Properties of flat-pressed wood plastic composites as a function of particle size and mixing ratio

  • Khandkar- Siddikur Rahman
  • Md Nazrul Islam
  • Sourav Bagchi Ratul
  • Nabila Hasan Dana
  • Saleh Md. Musa
  • Md. Obaidullah Hannan
Original Article


This paper presents the effects of particle size and mixing ratio on the properties including physical, mechanical, and decay resistance of wood plastic composites (WPCs). In addition, it also presents the effects of immersion temperatures on water absorption (WA) and thickness swelling (TS) of the WPCs. WPCs with a thickness of 6 mm were fabricated from Albizia richardiana King & Prain wood particles and recycled polyethylene terephthalate (PET) by the flat-press method. To prepare the WPCs, two different wood particle sizes (0.5–1.0 and 1.01–2.0 mm) were used along with four different mixing ratios (w/w). Subsequently, the physical properties include density, moisture content, WA, and TS, and mechanical properties include modulus of elasticity (MOE) and modulus of rupture (MOR) of the produced WPCs was evaluated. Furthermore, decay resistance was evaluated by the weight loss percentage method. Moreover, the effects of immersion temperatures on WA and TS of WPCs after 24 h of immersion in water at three different temperatures, i.e., 25, 50, and 75 °C were investigated. Results showed that the wood particle size had impact on WPC’s density (only 6% decreased with the increase of particle size); however, the density decreased by 29% when the wood particle content increased from 40 to 70%. The WA and TS gradually increased with the increase of particle content and decrease of particle size. In addition, WA and TS increased proportionately with increasing immersion temperature from 25 to 75 °C. Furthermore, the highest MOE (2570 N/mm2) was found for the WPCs fabricated from large wood particles having the ration of 50:50 (wood particle:PET). For decay resistance, WPCs consisted of larger particles and higher PET content showed greater resistance against decay. Therefore, it is comprehensible that fabrication of the WPCs from 50% large particles and 50% PET is technically feasible and further improvement of WPC performance like enhancement of MOE and reduction of density using coupling agent and agricultural waste fibers, respectively, in the WPC formulation is recommended.


Albizia richardiana PET Hot pressing Physical and mechanical properties Decay resistance 



The authors would like to thank Akij Particle Board Mills Ltd. Manikganj, Bangladesh for providing the support to evaluate the mechanical properties of the WPCs.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors have declared that they have no conflict of interest.


  1. 1.
    Clemons C (2002) Wood–plastic composites in the United States: the interfacing of two industries. For Prod J 52(6):10–18Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Najafi SK, Tajvidi M, Hamidina E (2007) Effect of temperature, plastic type and virginity on the water uptake of sawdust/plastic composites. Holz Roh Werkst 65(5):377–382CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Rahman KS, Islam MN, Rahman MM, Hannan MO, Dungani R, Khalil HA (2013) Flat-pressed wood plastic composites from sawdust and recycled polyethylene terephthalate (PET): physical and mechanical properties. SpringerPlus 2:629CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chaharmahali M, Tajvidi M, Najafi SK (2008) Mechanical properties of wood plastic composite panels made from waste fiberboard and particleboard. Polym Compos 29(6):606–610CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ayrilmis N, Benthien JT, Thoemen H, White RH (2012) Effects of fire retardants on physical, mechanical, and fire properties of flat-pressed WPCs. Eur J Wood Prod 70(1–3):215–224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chen HC, Chen TY, Hsu CH (2006) Effects of wood particle size and mixing ratios of HDPE on the properties of the composites. Holz Roh Werkst 64(3):172–177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Benthien J, Thoemen H, Weißmann V (2009) Flat-pressed WPC: effects of raw materials and process parameters on the physical and mechanical board properties. In: Carus M (ed) Third German WPC-Congress, 2–3 December 2009. Maritim Hotel, Köln, p 19Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ayrilmis N, Jarusombuti S (2011) Flat-pressed wood plastic composite as an alternative to conventional wood-based panels. J Compos Mater 45(1):103–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Benthien JT, Thoemen H (2012) Effects of raw materials and process parameters on the physical and mechanical properties of flat pressed WPC panels. Compos Part A Appl Sci Manuf 43(4):570–576CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ayrilmis N, Jarusombuti S, Fueangvivat V, Bauchongkol P (2011) Effect of thermal-treatment of wood fibres on properties of flat-pressed wood plastic composites. Polym Degrad Stab 96(5):818–822CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jarusombuti S, Ayrilmis N (2011) Surface characteristics and overlaying properties of flat-pressed wood plastic composites. Eur J Wood Prod 69(3):375–382CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fang L, Xiong X, Wang X, Chen H, Mo X (2017) Effects of surface modification methods on mechanical and interfacial properties of high-density polyethylene-bonded wood veneer composites. J Wood Sci 63(1):65–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ebe K, Sekino N (2015) Surface deterioration of wood plastic composites under outdoor exposure. J Wood Sci 61(2):143–150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    ASTM E11-17 (2017) Standard specification for woven wire test sieve cloth and test sieves. ASTM International, West ConshohockenGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    ASTM D 1037 (1999) Standard test methods for evaluating properties of wood-based fiber and particle panel materials static tests of timbers. ASTM, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    BS EN ISO 846 (1997) Plastic-evaluation of the action of micro-organisms. International Organization for Standardization, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    ANSI A208 (1999) American National Standard: particleboard. CPA, Gaithersburg, p 11Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Adhikary KB, Pang S, Staiger MP (2008) Dimensional stability and mechanical behaviour of wood–plastic composites based on recycled and virgin high-density polyethylene (HDPE). Compos B Eng 39(5):807–815CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hidayat HERP., Keijsers ERP, Prijanto U, van Dam JEG, Heeres HJ (2014) Preparation and properties of binderless boards from Jatropha curcas L. seed cake. Ind Crops Prod 52:245–254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bledzki AK, Faruk O, Huque M (2002) Physico-mechanical studies of wood fiber reinforced composites. Polym Plast Technol Eng 41(3):435–451CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Shibata M, Takachiyo K, Ozawa K, Yosomiya R, Takeishi H (2002) Biodegradable polyester composites reinforced with short abaca fiber. J Appl Polym Sci 85(1):129–138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Mankowski M, Morrell JJ (2000) Patterns of fungal attack in wood-plastic composites following exposure in a soil block test. Wood Fiber Sci 32:340–345Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Verhey S, Laks P, Richter D (2001) Laboratory decay resistance of woodfiber/thermoplastic composites. For Prod J 51(9):44–49Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kartal SN, Aysal S, Terzi E, Yılgör N, Yoshimura T, Tsunoda K (2013) Wood and bamboo-PP composites: fungal and termite resistance, water absorption, and FT-IR analyses. BioResources 8(1):1222–1244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Pendleton DE, Hoffard TA, Adcock T, Woodward B, Wolcott MP (2002) Durability of an extruded HDPE/wood composite. For Prod J 52(6):21–27Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Japan Wood Research Society 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Khandkar- Siddikur Rahman
    • 1
  • Md Nazrul Islam
    • 1
  • Sourav Bagchi Ratul
    • 1
  • Nabila Hasan Dana
    • 1
  • Saleh Md. Musa
    • 1
  • Md. Obaidullah Hannan
    • 1
  1. 1.Forestry and Wood Technology Discipline, Life Science SchoolKhulna UniversityKhulnaBangladesh

Personalised recommendations