Journal of Materials Science

, Volume 40, Issue 16, pp 4325–4332 | Cite as

Surface properties of wood and MDF after ultrasonic-assisted cutting

  • Gerhard Sinn
  • Herwig Mayer
  • Stefanie Stanzl-Tschegg


Surfaces created by ultrasonic-assisted cutting (UC) of beech and spruce and of medium density fibreboard (MDF) are compared to surfaces obtained by conventional linear cutting (CC) using a sharp tool. Topography is evaluated performing roughness measurements and scanning electron microscopy. No effect of UC procedure on mean roughness is found. The surface of MDF and large areas of the surfaces of the woods appear similar after UC and CC, whereas other regions show impact marks and microscopic reels produced by the periodic oscillation of the tool in UC. The wettability of surfaces produced with both wood processing techniques is similar. Surface free energy measurements indicate accelerated ageing caused by UC, probably due to heating.


Polymer Microscopy Electron Microscopy Scanning Electron Microscopy Free Energy 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    V. K. ASTASHEV and V. I. BABITSKY, Ultrasonics 36 (1998) 89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    C. S. LIU, B. ZHAO, G. F. GAO and F. JIAO, J. Mater. Process. Technol. 129 (2002) 196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    G. F. GAO, B. ZHAO, F. JIAO and C. S. LIU, ibid. 129 (2002) 66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    M. JIN and M. MURAKAWA, ibid. 113 (2001) 342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    J.-D. KIM and I.-H. CHOI, ibid. 68 (1997) 89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    M. ZHOU, X. J. WANG, B. K. A. NGOI and J. G. K. GAN, ibid. 121 (2002) 243.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    K. KATO, K. TSUZUKI and I. ASANO, Mokuzai Gakkaishi 17 (1971) 57.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    K. FUJIWARA, M. NOGUCHI and H. SUGHIHARA, ibid. 22 (1976) 76.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    G. SINN, P. BEER, B. ZETTL and H. MAYER, in Proceedings of the 16th IWMS, Matsue, Japan, August 2003, edited by P. C. Tanaka (Organizing Committee of the 16 IWMS. Faculty of Science and Engineering, Shimane University, Matsue, Japan, 2003) p. 203.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    M. DE MEIJER and H. MILITZ, Progr. Org. Coat. 38 (2000) 223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    M. STEHR, J. SELTMAN and I. JOHANSSON, Holzforschung 53 (1999) 93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    M. STEHR, ibid. 53 (1999) 655.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    M. STEHR and I. JOHANSSON, J. Adhes. Sci. Technol. 14 (2000) 1211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    H. A. CORE, W. A. CôTÉ and A. C. DAY, in “Wood: Sructure and Identification” edited by W. A. Côté, Syracuse Wood Science Series, 6 (Syracuse University Press, Syracuse, 1979).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    E. MAGOSS and G. SITKEI, in 15th IWMS, Los Angeles, California, USA, 2001, edited by R. Szymani (Berkeley, CA) p. 437.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    T. NGUYEN and W. E. JOHNS, Wood Sci. Technol. 13 (1979) 29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    M. DUNKY and P. NIEMZ, in “Holzwerkstoffe und Leime. Technologie und Einflussfaktoren” (Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, 2002) p. 135.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    J. KOPAC and S. SALI, J. Mater. Process. Technol. 133 (2003) 134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    E. WESTKdMPER and A. RIEGEL, Holz Roh. Werk. 50 (1992) 475.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    L. MUMMERY and R. ROMETSCH, “Rauheitsmessung. Theorie und Praxis” (Hommelwerke, VS-Schwenningen, 1993) p. 24.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    M. GINDL, G. SINN, A. REITERER and S. TSCHEGG, Holzforschung 55 (2001) 433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    M. GINDL, G. SINN, W. GINDL, A. REITERER and S. TSCHEGG, Coll. Surf. A 181 (2001) 279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    M. GINDL and S. TSCHEGG, Langmuir 18 (2002) 3209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    M. E. P. WÅLINDER, Holzforschung 56 (2002) 363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    M. DE MEIJER, S. HAEMERS, W. COBBEN and H. MILITZ, Langmuir 16 (2000) 9352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    R. GOOD J., “Contact Angle, Wettability and Adhesion” edited by K. L. Mittal (VSP, Utrecht, 1993) p. 3.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    B. ETTELT, “Sägen Fräsen Hobeln Bohren: Die Spanung von Holz und ihre Werkzeuge” (DRW-Verlag Weinbrenner GmbH & Co., Leinfelden-Echterdingen, 1997).Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Y. FUJIWARA, Y. FUJII and S. OKUMURA, in Proceedings of the 16th IWMS, Matsue, Japan, August 2003, edited by P. C. Tanaka (Organizing Committee of the 16th IWMS. Faculty of Science and Engineering, Shimane University, Matsue, Japan, 2003) p. 359.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    M. GINDL, A. REITERER, G. SINN and S. E. STANZL-TSCHEGG, Holz Roh. Werk. 62 (2004) 273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    A. W. CHRISTIANSEN, Wood Fiber Sci. 22 (1990) 441.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Idem., ibid. 23 (1991) 69.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media, Inc. 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gerhard Sinn
    • 1
  • Herwig Mayer
    • 1
  • Stefanie Stanzl-Tschegg
    • 2
    • 3
  1. 1.Institute of Physics and Materials ScienceViennaAustria
  2. 2.Institute of Physics and Materials ScienceViennaAustria
  3. 3.Christian Doppler—Laboratory for Fundamentals of Wood MachiningViennaAustria

Personalised recommendations