Next Article in Journal
Effect of Various Forms of Aluminum 6082 on the Mechanical Properties, Microstructure and Surface Modification of the Profile after Extrusion Process
Next Article in Special Issue
Influence of the Structure of Lattice Beams on Their Strength Properties
Previous Article in Journal
0.7Pb(Mg1/3Nb2/3)O3-0.3PbTiO3 Phosphate Composites: Dielectric and Ferroelectric Properties
Previous Article in Special Issue
Properties of Eco-Friendly Particleboards Bonded with Lignosulfonate-Urea-Formaldehyde Adhesives and pMDI as a Crosslinker
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Materials
Volume 14
Issue 17
10.3390/ma14175064
materials-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Structural Application of Lightweight Panels Made of Waste Cardboard and Beech Veneer

by
Vassil Jivkov
1,2,*,
Ralitsa Simeonova
1,
Petar Antov
3,
Assia Marinova
1,
Boryana Petrova
1 and
Lubos Kristak
4,*
1
Department of Interior and Furniture Design, Faculty of Forest Industry, University of Forestry, 1797 Sofia, Bulgaria
2
Department of Interior and Architectural Design, Faculty of Architecture, University of Architecture, Civil Engineering and Geodesy, 1046 Sofia, Bulgaria
3
Department of Mechanical Wood Technology, Faculty of Forest Industry, University of Forestry, 1797 Sofia, Bulgaria
4
Faculty of Wood Sciences and Technology, Technical University in Zvolen, T. G. Masaryka 24, 960 01 Zvolen, Slovakia
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Materials 2021, 14(17), 5064; https://doi.org/10.3390/ma14175064
Submission received: 10 August 2021 / Revised: 27 August 2021 / Accepted: 1 September 2021 / Published: 4 September 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advanced Eco-friendly Wood-Based Composites)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
In recent years, the furniture design trends include ensuring ergonomic standards, development of new environmentally friendly materials, optimised use of natural resources, and sustainably increased conversion of waste into value-added products. The circular economy principles require the reuse, recycling or upcycling of materials. The potential of reusing waste corrugated cardboard to produce new lightweight boards suitable for furniture and interior applications was investigated in this work. Two types of multi-layered panels were manufactured in the laboratory from corrugated cardboard and beech veneer, bonded with urea-formaldehyde (UF) resin. Seven types of end corner joints of the created lightweight furniture panels and three conventional honeycomb panels were tested. Bending moments and stiffness coefficients in the compression test were evaluated. The bending strength values of the joints made of waste cardboard and beech veneer exhibited the required strength for application in furniture constructions or as interior elements. The joints made of multi-layer panels with a thickness of 51 mm, joined by dowels, demonstrated the highest bending strength and stiffness values (33.22 N∙m). The joints made of 21 mm thick multi-layer panels and connected with Confirmat had satisfactory bending strength values (10.53 N∙m) and Minifix had the lowest strength values (6.15 N∙m). The highest stiffness values (327 N∙m/rad) were determined for the 50 mm thick cardboard honeycomb panels connected by plastic corner connector and special screw Varianta, and the lowest values for the joints made of 21 mm thick multi-layer panels connected by Confirmat (40 N∙m/rad) and Minifix (43 N∙m/rad), respectively. The application of waste corrugated cardboard as a structural material for furniture and interiors can be improved by further investigations.

1. Introduction

Limited wood resources worldwide require efficient utilisation of waste and by-products, cascading use of the available lignocellulosic raw materials, and search for alternative production processes and materials [1,2,3,4,5,6,7]. The COVID-19 crisis has also led to changes in the market and a shortage of resources, including solid wood and furniture panels. The reuse of materials provides new opportunities and represents a sustainable way to address this shortage. The use of corrugated cardboard, a mainstream packaging material, is an option to minimise the problem.
One of the pioneers in the use of non-traditional solutions to save raw materials and lighten the construction of furniture is IKEA. The furniture giant applied paper as a honeycomb core in the 1980s when they started producing the Lack series [8], which was significantly further developed in the last 10–15 years. The honeycomb core is usually prefabricated from craft paper and delivered at an ordered thickness as compressed harmonica-like layers [9]. The technology for producing such panels has been significantly developed over the last 10 years [10]. Panels weighing less than 500 kg/m3 are defined as light panels, below 350 kg/m3 are very light, and below 200 kg/m3 are ultra-light ones [11]. Some of the first comprehensive studies on the application, manufacturing, and properties of paper honeycomb panels were done by Hänel and Weinert [12] and Poppensieker and Thömen [13]. Many studies were made to evaluate the mechanical properties of honeycomb panels [14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21]. Other studies investigated the possibilities for optimisation of the structure of paper honeycomb panels. Smardzewski and Prekrat [22] concluded that the stiffness and strength of cell panels were affected significantly by the weight of paper used to manufacture their cores and the shape and dimensions of cells. Other results showed that sandwich panels with a wavy core can sustain higher loads than honeycombs [23]. Słonina et al. [24] reported that impregnating solutions can be applied to improve the paper core’s stiffness. The possibility of manufacturing lightweight flat pressed wood plastic composites were investigated by Lyutyy et al. [25].
Gößwald et al. [26] investigated the potential of using planer shavings with a length over 4 mm for manufacturing low-density one-layer particleboard with a thickness of 10 mm as an option to reduce the raw material demand for wood-based panels. A team of scientists [27] investigated the effect of relative humidity on the strength properties of lightweight panels and found out that after exposure to 95% relative humidity, facings and sandwiches lost up to half their original strength properties. By establishing a 3D moisture-displacement finite element model, the influence of constant and cycle humidity and varied temperature on the flexural creep of the sandwich panel containing Kraft honeycomb core and wood composite skins was studied by Chen et al. [28]. The influence of core shape was studied by several authors [23,29,30,31]. In the last few years, the strength and stiffness of furniture panels with auxetic cores were investigated. The auxetic cores of the sandwich cellular wood panels exhibited strong orthotropic properties [32]. During bending, wood-based honeycomb panels with auxetic cores absorb energy more effectively than the same panels subjected to axial compression [20]. The relative density of cells significantly affects their mechanical strength [33]. Using an auxetic core and facings of plywood and cardboard significantly reduces the amount of dissipated energy [21].
The problematic parts of applying paper honeycomb panels as structural elements are the joints [11]. For this reason, there is a growing industrial and academic interest on the investigation and optimization of these types of joints [16,34,35,36,37,38]. Some of the authors studied the bending strength of the joints [36,38,39], but tensile and shear tests were applied, as well [15,34,35,38,39]. Lightweight honeycomb panels with different thicknesses have been tested. Several authors studied panels with a relatively small thickness, ranged between 15 and 19 mm [21,22,34,35,38,39,40,41]. Other studies were focused on the evaluation of panels with a thickness of 38 mm [15,34,36]. Only one research was found with a commercially produced honeycomb panel with 50 mm thickness [37]. Both glued [21,34] and non-glued joints [36,37,38] appeared in the studies. Screw withdrawal resistance in honeycomb panels was investigated by some researchers [15,37,40,41].
Lightweight paper panels and paper tubes were analysed concerning their suitability as furniture materials by Petutschnigg and Ebner [16]. The authors concluded that the bending strength of the lightweight paper panel is too low for use in furniture applications and development of materials and joints with enhanced strength properties is needed.
Corrugated cardboard has a relatively low weight, is easily available, recyclable, and waste cardboard can be reused. With the development of online commerce, the use of cardboard packaging, including corrugated cardboard, has been significantly increased. In 2018, the production of paper and paperboard packaging was estimated to 256,138 thousand metric tons worldwide [42]. Around 80% of all goods sold in Europe and the US are in cartons [43]. At the same time, only 65.7% of waste cardboard in the European Union is recycled [44]. This enormous amount of waste cardboard is a challenge to absorb and obtain new products based on recycling or reuse.
In the literature, there are publications about using waste cardboard as a material for producing new panels. In part of the research, the cardboard is processed and incorporated into new composites [45,46]. Several investigations were carried out to evaluate the mechanical properties of cardboard made from recycled beverage cartons [47,48,49,50,51]. Other researchers used the waste cardboard in the form in which it was obtained [52]. There are many examples of furniture made of cardboard, such as shelves, chairs, tables, desks, even sofas [53]. Some companies specialised in the production of cardboard furniture [54,55]. A Japanese bedding company has created a cardboard bed for athletes at the Tokyo 2020 Olympics. The bed frames were made from recycled cardboard [56]. There is also furniture made of second-hand cardboard, but these are usually of relatively simple structure. Even building construction components were objects of experimentation using sheets of waste cardboard collected from the waste stream [57]. Corrugated cardboard has a good strength-to-weight ratio, excellent burst strength, and resistance to crushing, thus being an ideal material for furniture manufacture [58]. Furthermore, adhesives applicable in the wood-processing and furniture industry can be used to bond such panels.
There is limited information about the strength characteristics of the corner joints made of corrugated cardboard.
The aim of the study was to investigate the possibilities of joining lightweight panels made from waste corrugated board and beech veneer, bonded with urea-formaldehyde (UF) resin and evaluate their application in furniture and interior constructions. For strength comparison, joints obtained from conventional lightweight cardboard honeycomb panels with a thickness of 50 mm were also tested.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Materials

In order to establish the possibility of using waste cardboard as a structural material for furniture and interior applications, experimental multi-layer panels were produced in the laboratory using a three-ply corrugated waste cardboard and rotary cut beech (Fagus sylvatica L.) veneer sheets with a thickness of 1.2 mm and a moisture content of approximately 8%, provided by the factory Welde Bulgaria AD (Troyan, Bulgaria). The waste cardboard sheets with a length of 1150 mm and width of 780 mm were taken from packages of goods, shipping in pallets, where this cardboard is used as a divider between individual goods. The cardboard sheets had the following dimensions: Thickness of 3.94 mm, top layer of 0.15 mm, and corrugated paper core layer of 0.10 mm. Density of the cardboard was 114 kg/m3. Commercially available UF resin with dry solids content of 64%, density of 1.29–1.31 g.cm−3 at 20 °C, pH value of 8.5, and a molar ratio of 1.16, provided by the company Kastamonu Bulgaria AD (Gorno Sahrane, Bulgaria), was used for hot pressing. The experimental panels were fabricated under laboratory conditions on a single opening hydraulic press (PMC ST 100, Italy). The press temperature used was t = 100 °C. The specific bonding pressure was 0.2 N/mm2 for 21 mm thickness and 0.13 N/mm2 for 51 mm thickness of the panels, respectively.
Commercial, commonly produced lightweight panels with a thickness of 50 mm were also included in the study to compare the obtained experimental data with industrially produced lightweight panels. The top layers were 8 mm laminated particleboards and a hexagon honeycomb for the core layer. The commercial panels were supplied by Egger (Fritz Egger GmbH & Co. OG, Weiberndorf 20, 6380 St. Johann in Tirol, Austria).
The laboratory-fabricated multi-layer panels were designed with thicknesses similar to the thicknesses of the commercially available panels, i.e., 50 and 20 mm. This was achieved by adjusting the bonding pressure. The structure of the lightweight panels used in the study was as follows:
  • Multi-layer panel with a thickness of 21 mm made of 7 layers of veneer and 6 layers of corrugated cardboard (Figure 1).
  • Multi-layer panel with a thickness of 51 mm made of 13 layers of veneer and 12 layers of corrugated cardboard (Figure 2).
  • Cardboard honeycomb panel with a thickness of 50 mm, manufactured by Egger, Austria (Figure 3).
After hot pressing, the laboratory-produced panels were conditioned for 7 days at 20 ± 2 °C and 65% relative humidity.
The density of all fabricated panels was below 500 kg/m3 (Table 1). Details about the manufacturing process and the physical and mechanical properties of the developed lightweight panels are given in a previous research [18].

2.2. Type of Corner Joints Made of Lightweight Panels

For the purpose of the study, 10 series with a total number of 129 test samples were made. Some well-known connecting solutions were used for the joints, such as a dowel joint, one-element connector Confirmat, an eccentric connector Minifix with a bolt for ø5 mm hole and a plastic corner joint, as well as special connectors and screws designed for lightweight honeycomb panels. Joint types, detailed dimensions, and types of connecting elements are shown in Figure 4. Each joint had only one connecting element.

2.3. Test Methods

The type and shape of test samples, made in accordance with the test method, described by Kyuchukov and Jivkov [11], are shown in Figure 5. The dimensions δ1 and δ2 are equal and correspond to the thickness of the panels. The dimensions L1 and L2 are also equal and depend on the thickness of the panels.
In furniture constructions, the joints are most often loaded in bending with arm compression and arm opening. It has been found from many research studies that the strength and the deformation resistance of the joints are lower under the arm compression loading compared to that under loading with arm opening [11]. Therefore, for the purpose of the present study, it was accepted to investigate end corner joints of lightweight structural elements under bending loading with arm compression. The principal test scheme of the test specimens is given in Figure 6.
The criterion for determining the strength of the tested joints is the maximum bending moment Mmax calculated according to the formula:
Mmax = F ∙ l,
where F is the maximum force under arm compression bending, N, and l is arm, m.
The criterion for determining the deformation characteristic of the corner joints is the stiffness coefficient с [11,59].
The deformation of the joints under the compression bending test gives as a result changes in both the right angle between the joint arms and the bending arms l of the forces (Figure 7).
The linear displacement fi of the application points of the forces Fi is recorded for each test sample at each loading level. It represents a sum of displacement resulting from turning the joint arms and additional displacement Δi resulting from bending of the arms.
The displacement Δi is calculated by the formula:
Δ i = F i a 3 3 E I
where
Fi is the magnitude of the load forces with arm compression, N;
a is the axial length of the joint arms, m;
E is the modulus of elasticity, N/mm2;
I is the axial moment of inertia of the cross-section of the joint arms, m4,
which is calculated by the formula:
I = δ b 3 12 ,
where
b is the width of the arms, m;
δ is the thickness of the arms, m.
The distance between the force application points at each level of loading is determined by the formula:
L 1 = L − f i + Δ i ,
The angle γ i [rad] changed under loading between the joint arms is calculated by the formula:
γ i = 2 arcsin L i 2 a = 2 arcsin L − f i + Δ i 2 a ,
The changed bending arm li is determined by the formula:
l i = a cos γ i 2 ,
The result from the deformation under the compression bending test is the semi-rigid rotation of the joint arms in [rad]:
α i = π 2 − γ i ,
For 10 and 40% of the load force Fi, the bending moment in [N∙m] is calculated according to the formula:
M i = F i l i ,
The stiffness coefficient under the compression bending test ci [N∙m/rad] is calculated by the formula:
c i = Δ M i Δ α i ,
In (8), the following designations are used:
Δ M i = M i − M 0
Δ α i = α i − α 0
where Mi and αi are determined according to (8) and (7) for the value of force Fi equal to 40% of Fmax, and M0 and α0 according to (8) and (7) or the value of force F0, equal to 10% of Fmax.
The stiffness coefficient c as a deformation characteristic of the corner joint under the compression bending test is defined as the arithmetic means of the result of (9) numbers for each test sample when loaded in the section, which corresponds to the linear section on the curve of the correlation between the bending moment and the corner deformation of the joint.
The test was carried out in the scientific and research laboratory at the Institute of Mechanics and Biomechanics, BAS, Sofia, on a TIRA test 2000 universal type testing machine (TIRA GmbH, Schalkau, Germany). A sensor with a range of 1 kN was used to measure the force. The accuracy was 1%, for force over 10 N. The exact speed of the machine’s moving traverse was measured with the aid of the built-in incremental displacement measurement system and an electronic stopwatch. Using a Protek D470 handheld digital multi-meter (Protek Instrument Co., Ltd, Gwangmyeong Gwangmyeong, Korea) and a computer, the force-time relationship was recorded. The traverse displacement was calculated according to time and speed. In determining the deflection of the test sample, the deflection of the loaded parts of the machine was taken into account. The resulting force-displacement diagrams were centred. The maximum force, deflection at the maximum force, force and deflection at a point taken as the failure point, Ff = 0.8Fmax, were determined. Tests were carried out at the temperature of 20 ± 1 °C and a relative humidity of 55 ± 5%.
Descriptive statistical analysis of the results was done with XLSTAT, version 2020.2.3, Addinsoft, New York, NY, USA (2021). One-way ANOVA was performed on the results for the bending strength and stiffness coefficient of L-type corner joints to analyse variance at a 95% confidence interval (p < 0.05). The statistical differences between mean values were evaluated using Tukey’s honestly significant difference (HSD) post hoc test.

3. Results

3.1. Bending Moments of Corner Joints Made of Lightweight Panels

The results obtained from the bending strength test were processed statistically and are presented in Table 2 and Figure 8.
In analysing the results for the bending strength test of corner L-type joints of lightweight panels, it can be seen that they vary over a fairly wide range, from 33.33 to 6.15 N∙m. From the statistical analysis of the one-way ANOVA test and the pairwise comparison performed with the Tukey HSD, a significant difference of α = 0.05 at a confidence level of 95%, was found in seven groups between the obtained bending strength of the L-type end corner joints constructed from lightweight panels. The groups are given in Table 3. The highest strength value of 33.22 N∙m was determined for the joints made of multi-layer veneer panels and three-layer cardboard with a nominal thickness of 51 mm and joined by a dowel ø12 × 50 mm. This result can be attributed to the application of adhesive also on the edge of the glued workpiece and the large thickness of the structural elements. The cardboard honeycomb panel (50 mm) connected by a plastic corner connector and special screw Varianta exhibited a bending strength of 21.66 N∙m. The multi-layer panel (21 mm) made of veneer and corrugated cardboard, connected by a dowel ø8 × 35 mm, also showed excellent strength characteristics (15.41 N∙m).
The remaining joints demonstrated satisfactory strength characteristics with bending strength values ranging from 6.15 to 10.53 N.m. In this group, the highest strength had series b—multi-layer panel (21 mm) made of veneer and corrugated cardboard, connected by Confirmat ø7 × 70 mm (10.53 N∙m), followed by series j—cardboard honeycomb panel (50 mm) connected by TAB 20 HC (9.06 N∙m), and series i—cardboard honeycomb panel (50 mm) connected by Rafix 20 HC (8.10 N∙m). Finally, the lowest bending strength of 6.15 N∙m was recorded in series c—multi-layer panel (21 mm) made of veneer and corrugated cardboard, connected by an eccentric connector Minifix.

3.2. Stiffness Characteristics of Corner Joints Made of Lightweight Panels

When analysing the results for the stiffness of the corner L-type joints of lightweight panels, it can be seen that the picture was slightly different. The stiffness values varied from 327 to 40 N∙m/rad (Table 4). From the statistical analysis of the one-way ANOVA test and the pairwise comparison performed with the Tukey HSD (Table 5), a significant difference of α = 0.05 at a confidence level of 95% was found in six groups between the obtained stiffness coefficients L-type end corner joints constructed from lightweight panels. The greatest stiffness was exhibited by joints made of conventional honeycomb lightweight 50 mm thick panels. This can be explained with an outer layer that is 8 mm thick, which gives more rigidity to the panel and joints. The highest stiffness value of 327 N∙m/rad had the joints made of honeycomb panel—series h, connected by a plastic corner connector and special screw Varianta, followed by a cardboard honeycomb panel (50 mm) connected by Rafix 20 HC (225 N∙m/rad), and a cardboard honeycomb panel (50 mm) connected by TAB 20 HC (195 N∙m/rad). A multi-layer panel (51 mm) made of veneer and corrugated cardboard, connected by a dowel ø12 × 50 mm was the joint with the highest stiffness of the corrugated board joints (154 N∙m/rad), followed by a multi-layer panel (21 mm) made of veneer and corrugated cardboard, connected by Confirmat ø7 × 70 mm (111 N∙m/rad). A very low stiffness was shown by the joints made of a multi-layer panel made of veneer and corrugated cardboard with a thickness of 21 mm. Joints from these panels connected by a plastic corner connector and special screw Varianta had a stiffness coefficient of 49 N∙m/rad, followed by an eccentric connector Minifix (43 N∙m/rad) and Confirmat ø7 × 70 mm (40 N∙m/rad). A graphical representation of the results obtained is shown in Figure 9.

4. Discussion

4.1. Bending Strength of Corner Joints Made of Lightweight Panels

From the results obtained for the bending strength of the corner joints, made of lightweight panels comprising waste cardboard and beech veneer, bonded with UF resin, it can be concluded that they possess the required strength for application in furniture constructions or as interior elements. The joints in both variants of multi-layer corrugated cardboard, with a thickness of 21 and 51 mm, exhibited good bending strength characteristics when connected by gluing with dowels. The results were within the range of bending strength values achieved by [36], where, however, the authors used two connecting elements in each joint. Joints of cardboard honeycomb panel (50 mm) connected by a plastic corner connector and special screw Varianta showed excellent bending strength. More than twice is the strength exhibited by the joints with TAB 20HC in the present study compared to the study conducted by Joscak et al. [60]. To note, multi-layer panels with a thickness of 21 mm made of veneer and corrugated cardboard, connected by an eccentric connector Minifix, showed lesser strength compared to the results of other studies [38,61]. However, it was in the range of similar joints made of laminated particleboards and medium-density fiberboard (MDF) with a thickness of 18 mm [11,59]. There was no significant difference in the joint’s strength of multi-layer panel (51 mm) made of veneer and corrugated cardboard, connected by Rafix 20 HC, inserted across and longitudinally on the cardboard direction. Cardboard honeycomb panel (50 mm) and multi-layer panel (51 mm) made of veneer and corrugated cardboard connected by Rafix 20 HC shows a similar joint strength. Although the bending strength of the joints of 21 mm thick multi-layer panels made of waste cardboard and beech veneer connected by Confirmat did not reach the values obtained with particleboards, plywood, and MDF [62,63,64,65,66,67], still their strength properties were sufficient to be used as an option for joining.

4.2. Stiffness Characteristics of Corner Joints Made of Lightweight Panels

When analysing the results for the stiffness of the joints, it can be seen that the picture is different. The highest stiffness values were obtained for the joints made of 50 mm thick cardboard honeycomb panel coupled by a plastic corner connector with a special screw Varianta, Rafix 20 HC, and TAB 20 HC, and might be explained by the excellent stiffness of the outer layers of laminated chipboard and the good construction of the special connectors and screws developed for honeycomb panels. In the present study, joints connected with TAB 20 HC showed significantly higher stiffness compared to the results obtained by [37].
In contrast to the bending strength of the joints, the stiffness of the joints of cardboard honeycomb panel (50 mm) is more than two times higher compared to the multi-layer panel (51 mm) made of veneer and corrugated cardboard when connected by Rafix 20 HC.
Both multi-layer panels made of veneer and corrugated cardboard with a thickness of 51 and 21 mm, joined with a dowel ø12 × 50 mm and dowel ø8 × 35 mm, respectively, had sufficient rigidity to be used in furniture construction due to the application of an adhesive. Furthermore, the stiffness coefficients were in the range of other commonly used joints [68,69,70,71,72,73].
Joints exhibited relatively low stiffness with Confirmat and fasteners where screws were involved. The low stiffness of the 21 mm thick multi-layer veneer and corrugated cardboard joints resulted from the material’s lack of a rigid and dense structure, which prevented a high screw-holding capacity.

5. Conclusions

The COVID-19 pandemic posed new challenges to the normal business practice and competitiveness of industrial enterprises, connected with significant changes in the market and shortage of resources, including solid wood and furniture panels [74,75,76,77]. This study investigated the potential of using waste corrugated cardboard and beech veneer for manufacturing lightweight panels for furniture and interior structural elements application. For this purpose, various joints, fixed with adhesive and demountable joints were tested. As a result, the following conclusions were drawn:
  • The waste corrugated cardboard in combination with beech veneer is suitable for furniture constructions and interior elements.
  • The use of adhesive significantly increased the bending strength and stiffness of the joints of the veneer and corrugated cardboard panels in both studied panel thicknesses, i.e., 21 and 51 mm.
  • In terms of the stiffness coefficients, the best behaviour was exhibited by the joints, made of cardboard honeycomb panels with a thickness of 50 mm.
  • Except for the cardboard honeycomb panels, all of the tested panels where the demountable joints were used, showed a significantly lower strength compared to bonding.
  • There was no significant difference in the joint strength of the multi-layer 51 mm thick panel made of veneer and corrugated cardboard, connected by Rafix 20 HC, inserted across and longitudinally on the cardboard direction.
  • The cardboard honeycomb panel (50 mm) and multi-layer panel (51 mm) made of veneer and corrugated cardboard connected by Rafix 20 HC show a similar joint strength.
  • Although lightweight corrugated cardboards did not have sufficient density, the conventional joints such as Minifix, Confrimat, and plastic corner joints demonstrated comparable strength characteristics and stiffness to particleboard joints.
Future research should be focused on the development of the multi-layer waste corrugated cardboard and veneer lightweight panels as a prospective and sustainable material for furniture and other applications, in order to improve the strength and other features of the joints.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, V.J. and R.S.; methodology, V.J., A.M. and R.S.; software, V.J. and B.P.; validation, V.J., P.A., A.M., B.P. and L.K.; formal analysis, V.J. and B.P.; investigation, R.S.; resources, V.J., R.S. and L.K.; data curation, V.J. and B.P.; writing—original draft preparation, V.J. and B.P.; writing—review and editing, P.A. and L.K.; visualisation, B.P.; supervision, V.J.; project administration, V.J. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

The research was funded by the Scientific and Research Sector at the University of Forestry, Sofia, Bulgaria (project no. 77/2011) and projects by the Slovak Research and Development Agency under contracts no. APVV-18-0378, APVV-19-0269, and APVV-20-0004.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Acknowledgments

This publication is the result of the implementation of the following projects: Project no. 77/2011 and project no. HИC-Б-1145/04.2021 “Development, Properties and Application of Eco-Friendly Wood-Based Composites” carried out at the University of Forestry, Sofia, Bulgaria, as well as the National Programme “Young Scientists and Postdoctoral Students” of the Bulgarian Ministry of Education and Science.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Korol, J.; Hejna, A.; Wypiór, K.; Mijalski, K.; Chmielnicka, E. Wastes from Agricultural Silage Film Recycling Line as a Potential Polymer Materials. Polymers 2021, 13, 1383. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Arias, A.; Feijoo, G.; Moreira, M.T. Evaluation of Starch as an Environmental-Friendly Bioresource for the Development of Wood Bioadhesives. Molecules 2021, 26, 4526. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Savov, V.; Valchev, I.; Yavorov, N.; Sabev, K. Influence of press factor and additional thermal treatment on technology for production of eco-friendly MDF based on lignosulfonate adhesives. Bulg. Chem. Com. 2020, 52, 48–52. [Google Scholar]
  4. Taghiyari, H.R.; Majidi, R.; Esmailpour, A.; Sarvari Samadi, Y.; Jahangiri, A.; Papadopoulos, A.N. Engineering composites made from wood and chicken feather bonded with UF resin fortified with wollastonite: A novel approach. Polymers 2020, 12, 857. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  5. Rammou, E.; Mitani, A.; Ntalos, G.; Koutsianitis, D.; Taghiyari, H.R.; Papadopoulos, A.N. The Potential Use of Seaweed (Posidonia oceanica) as an Alternative Lignocellulosic Raw Material for Wood Composites Manufacture. Coatings 2021, 11, 69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Taghiyari, H.R.; Militz, H.; Antov, P.; Papadopoulos, A.N. Effects of Wollastonite on Fire Properties of Particleboard Made from Wood and Chicken Feather Fibers. Coatings 2021, 11, 518. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Kwidziński, Z.; Bednarz, J.; Pędzik, M.; Sankiewicz, Ł.; Szarowski, P.; Knitowski, B.; Rogoziński, T. Innovative Line for Door Production TechnoPORTA—Technological and Economic Aspects of Application of Wood-Based Materials. Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 4502. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. IKEA Home Page. Available online: https://www.ikea.com/ms/en_SG/about_ikea/the_ikea_way/history/ (accessed on 18 April 2021).
  9. Barbu, M.C. Evolution of lightweight wood composites. Pro. Ligno. 2015, 11, 21–26. [Google Scholar]
  10. Barbu, M.C.; Lüdtke, J.; Thömen, H.; Welling, J. Innovative production of wood-based lightweight panels. In Processing Technologies for the Forest and Biobased Products Industries; Barbu, M.C., Ed.; Salzburg University of Applied Sciences: Kuchl, Australia, 2010; pp. 115–122. [Google Scholar]
  11. Kyuchukov, G.; Jivkov, V. Furniture Construction. Structural Elements and Furniture Joints, 1st ed.; Bismar: Sofia, Bulgaria, 2016; p. 452. [Google Scholar]
  12. Hänel, W.; Weinert, M. Diätkur für Schwergewichte. Vorschläge zum Einsatz leichter Plattenwerkstoffe bei der Konstruktion von Möbeln; Ihd, Institut für Holztechnologie, Adam Verlag: Dresden, Germany, 2010. [Google Scholar]
  13. Poppensieker, J.; Thömen, H. Wabenplatten für den Möbelbau; Arbeitsbericht， Instituts für Holzphysik und Mechanische Technologie des Holzes， Bundesforschungsanstalt für Forst- und Holzwirtschaft: Hamburg, Germany, 2005. [Google Scholar]
  14. Barboutis, I.; Vassiliou, V. Strength properties of lightweight paper honeycomb panels for the furniture. In Proceedings of the 10th International Scientific Conference of Engineering Design (Interior and Furniture Design), Sofia, Bulgaria, 17–18 October 2005; pp. 17–18. [Google Scholar]
  15. Ebner, M.; Petutschnigg, A.J. Lightweight constructions-paper materials as a new option to build furniture. In Proceedings of the International Scientific Conference Interior and Furniture Design, University of Forestry, Sofia, Bulgaria, 1–5 October 2005; pp. 119–131. [Google Scholar]
  16. Petutschnigg, A.J.; Ebner, M. Lightweight paper materials for furniture—A design study to develop and evaluate materials and joints. Mater. Des. 2007, 28, 408–413. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Sam-Brew, S.; Semple, K.; Smith, G. Preliminary experiments on the manufacture of hollow core composite panels. For. Prod. J. 2011, 61, 381–389. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Jivkov, V.; Simeonova, R.; Kamenov, P.; Marinova, A. Strength properties of new lightweight panels for furniture and interiors. In Proceedings of the 23rd International Scientific Conference “Wood Is Good–With Knowledge and Technology to a Competitive Forestry and Wood Technology Sector”, Zagreb, Croatia, 12 October 2012; pp. 49–58. [Google Scholar]
  19. Chen, Z.; Yan, N.; Sam-Brew, S.; Smith, G.; Deng, J. Investigation of mechanical properties of sandwich panels made of paper honeycomb core and wood composite skins by experimental testing and finite element (FE) modelling methods. Eur. J. Wood Wood Prod. 2014, 72, 311–319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Smardzewski, J. Experimental and numerical analysis of wooden sandwich panels with an auxetic core and oval cells. Mater. Des. 2019, 183, 108159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Peliński, K.; Smardzewski, J. Bending behavior of lightweight wood-based sandwich beams with auxetic cellular core. Polymers 2020, 12, 1723. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Smardzewski, J.; Prekrat, S. Modelling of thin paper honeycomb panels for furniture. In Proceedings of the 23rd International Scientific Conference “Wood is Good–With Knowledge and Technology to a Competitive Forestry and Wood Technology Sector”, Zagreb, Croatia, 12 October 2012; pp. 179–186. [Google Scholar]
  23. Smardzewski, J. Mechanical properties of wood-based sandwich panels with a wavy core. In Proceedings of the XXVII International Conference Research for Furniture Industry, Ankara, Turkey, 17–18 September 2015; pp. 242–255. [Google Scholar]
  24. Słonina, M.; Dziurka, D.; Smardzewski, J. Experimental research and numerical analysis of the elastic properties of paper cell cores before and after impregnation. Materials 2020, 13, 2058. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Lyutyy, P.; Bekhta, P.; Ortynska, G. Lightweight flat pressed wood plastic composites: Possibility of manufacture and properties. Drv. Ind. 2018, 69, 55–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Gößwald, J.; Barbu, M.C.; Petutschnigg, A.; Krišťák, Ľ.; Tudor, E.M. Oversized Planer Shavings for the Core Layer of Lightweight Particleboard. Polymers 2021, 13, 1125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Semple, K.E.; Sam-Brew, S.; Deng, J.; Cote, F.; Yan, N.; Chen, Z.; Smith, G.D. Properties of commercial kraft paper honeycomb furniture stock panels conditioned under 65 and 95 percent relative humidity. For. Prod. J. 2015, 65, 106–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Chen, Z.; Yan, N.; Deng, J.; Semple, K.E.; Sam-Brew, S.; Smith, G.D. Influence of environmental humidity and temperature on the creep behavior of sandwich panel. Int. J. Mech. Sci. 2017, 134, 216–223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Smardzewski, J.; Majewski, A. Mechanical properties of auxetic honeycomb core with triangular cells. In Proceedings of the 25th International Scientific Conference: New Materials and Technologies in the Function of Wooden Products, Zagreb, Croatia, 17 October 2014; pp. 103–112. [Google Scholar]
  30. Sawal, N.; Nazri, A.B.M.; Akil, H.M. Effect of cell size material on the mechanical properties of honeycomb core structure. Int. J. Sci. Res. 2013, 4, 80–84. [Google Scholar]
  31. Smardzewski, J.; Gajęcki, A.; Wojnowska, M. Investigation of elastic properties of paper honeycomb panels with rectangular cells. BioResources 2019, 14, 1435–1451. [Google Scholar]
  32. Smardzewski, J. Elastic properties of cellular wood panels with hexagonal and auxetic cores. Holzforschung 2013, 67, 87–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Smardzewski, J.; Prekrat, S. Auxetic structures in layered furniture panels. In Proceedings of the 29th International Conference Wood Science Technology, Zagreb, Croatia, 6–7 December 2018; pp. 163–172. [Google Scholar]
  34. Petutschnigg, A.J.; Koblinger, R.; Pristovnik, M.; Truskaller, M.; Dermouz, H.; Zimmer, B. Leichtbauplatten aus Holzwerkstoffen—Teil I: Eckverbindungen. Holz Roh Werkst. 2004, 62, 405–410. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Heimbs, S.; Pein, M. Failure behaviour of honeycomb sandwich corner joints and inserts. Compos. Struct. 2009, 89, 575–588. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Koreny, A.; Simek, M.; Eckelman, C.A.; Haviarova, E. Mechanical properties of knock-down joints in honeycomb panels. BioResources 2013, 8, 4873–4882. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  37. Joscak, P.; Krasula, P.; Vimpel, P. Strength properties of corner joints and extending joints on honeycomb boards. Ann. Warsaw Univ. Life Sci.-SGGW. Forest. Wood Technol. 2014, 87, 97–104. [Google Scholar]
  38. Smardzewski, J.; Słonina, M.; Maslej, M. Stiffness and failure behaviour of wood based honeycomb sandwich corner joints in different climates. Compos. Struct. 2017, 168, 153–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Majewski, A.; Krystofiak, T.; Smardzewski, J. Mechanical Properties of Corner Joints Made of Honeycomb Panels with Double Arrow-Shaped Auxetic Cores. Materials 2020, 13, 4212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Petutschnigg, A.J.; Koblinger, R.; Pristovnik, M.; Truskaller, M.; Dermouz, H.; Zimmer, B. Leichtbauplatten aus Holzwerkstoffen. Teil II: Untersuchungzum Schraubenausziehwiderstand. Holz Roh Werkst. 2005, 63, 19–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Jivkov, V.; Kyuchukov, B.; Simeonova, R.; Marinova, A. Withdrawal capacity of screws and Confirmat into different wood-based panels. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Research for Furniture Industry, Poznan, Poland, 21–22 September 2017; pp. 68–82. [Google Scholar]
  42. Statista: Global Paper Production Volume from 2008 to 2018 by Type. Available online: https://www.statista.com/statistics/270317/production-volume-of-paper-by-type// (accessed on 9 May 2021).
  43. Cardboard Balers: Amazing Facts about Cardboard Waste & Recycling. Available online: https://www.cardboardbalers.org/cost-agricultural-solar-panels/ (accessed on 9 May 2021).
  44. Eurostat: Recycling Rate of Packaging Waste by Type of Packaging. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/view/cei_wm020/default/table?lang=en/ (accessed on 9 May 2021).
  45. Buratti, C.; Belloni, E.; Lascaro, E.; Lopez, G.A.; Ricciardi, P. Sustainable panels with recycled materials for building applications: Environmental and acoustic characterisation. Energy Procedia 2016, 101, 972–979. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Sair, S.; Mandili, B.; Taqi, M.; El Bouari, A. Development of a new eco-friendly composite material based on gypsum reinforced with a mixture of cork fibre and cardboard waste for building thermal insulation. Compos. Commun. 2019, 16, 20–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Ayrilmis, N.; Candan, Z.; Hiziroglu, S. Physical and mechanical properties of cardboard panels made from used beverage carton with veneer overlay. Mater. Des. 2008, 29, 1897–1903. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Sen, S.; Ayrilmis, N.; Zeki, C. Fungicide and insecticide properties of cardboard panels made from used beverage carton with veneer overlay. Afr. J. Agric. Res. 2010, 5, 159–165. [Google Scholar]
  49. Rhamin, H.; Madhoushi, M.; Ebrahimi, A. Faraji, F. Effect of resin content, press time and overlaying on physical and mechanical properties of carton board made from recycled beverage carton and MUF resin. Life Sci. J. 2010, 10, 613. [Google Scholar]
  50. Ebadi, M.; Farsi, M.; Narchin, P.; Madhoushi, M. The effect of beverage storage packets (Tetra Pak™) waste on mechanical properties of wood–plastic composites. J. Thermoplast. Compos. Mater. 2016, 29, 1601–1610. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Aranda-García, F.J.; González-Pérez, M.M.; Robledo-Ortíz, J.R. Influence of processing time on physical and mechanical properties of composite boards made of recycled multi-layer containers and HDPE. J. Mater. Cycles Waste Manag. 2020, 22, 2020–2028. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Asdrubali, F.; Pisello, A.L.; D’Alessandro, F.; Bianchi, F.; Cornicchia, M.; Fabiani, C. Innovative cardboard based panels with recycled materials from the packaging industry: Thermal and acoustic performance analysis. Energy Procedia 2015, 78, 321–326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Architecture Art Designs. Available online: https://www.architectureartdesigns.com/30-amazing-cardboard-diy-furniture-ideas// (accessed on 18 April 2021).
  54. Stange Design: Cardboard Furniture. Available online: https://www.pappmoebelshop.de/ (accessed on 18 April 2021).
  55. Petit & Small: Folding Creativity into Kids Furniture. Available online: https://petitandsmall.com/cardboard-furniture-cardboard-guys/?fbclid=IwAR11YDeR2N-ocpzByv-8aovz0Ck1oqmD3KssF7VM_n5H7xneO3frceHXSD0/ (accessed on 18 April 2021).
  56. Dezeen: Airweave Creates Cardboard Beds and Modular Mattresses for Tokyo 2020 Olympics. Available online: https://www.dezeen.com/2021/07/11/cardboard-beds-modular-mattresses-airweave-tokyo-2020-olympics/ (accessed on 9 August 2021).
  57. Diarte, J.; Shaffer, M.; Obonyo, E. Developing a Panelised Building System for Low-Cost Housing Using Waste Cardboard and Repurposed Wood. In Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Non-Conventional Materials and Technologies (NOCMAT) “2019 Construction Materials & Technologies for Sustainability”, Nairobi, Kenya, 5–7 November 2019. [Google Scholar]
  58. Suarez, B.; Muneta, M.L.M.; Sanz-Bobi, J.D.; Romero, G. Application of homogenisation approaches to the numerical analysis of seating made of multi-wall corrugated cardboard. Compos. Struct. 2021, 262, 113642. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Jivkov, V.; Marinova, A. Investigation on ultimate bending strength and stiffness under compression of corner joints from particleboard with connectors for DIY furniture. In Proceedings of the International Scientific Conference Interior and Furniture Design, Sofia, Bulgaria, 17–18 October 2005; pp. 155–165. [Google Scholar]
  60. Joscak, P.; Langova, N.; Tvrdovsky, M. Withdrawal resistance of wood screw in wood-based materials. Ann. Warsaw Univ. Life Sci.-SGGW. Forest. Wood Technol. 2014, 87, 90–96. [Google Scholar]
  61. Šimek, M.; Haviarová, E.; Eckelman, C. The end distance effect of knockdown furniture fasteners on bending moment resistance of corner joints. Wood Fiber Sci. 2008, 42, 92–98. [Google Scholar]
  62. Jivkov, V. Influence of edge banding on banding strength of end corner joints from 18 mm particleboard. Symposium “Furniture 2002”. Technical University-Zvolen, Zvolen, Slovakia, 24–25 October 2002. [Google Scholar]
  63. Župčić, I.; Grbac, I.; Bogner, A.; Hadžić, D. Research corner joints in corpus furniture. In Proceedings of the International Conference Ambienta “Wood is Good–With Knowledge and Technology to a Competitive Forestry and Wood Technology Sector”, Zagreb, Croatia, 12 October 2012; pp. 229–235. [Google Scholar]
  64. Yuksel, M.; Kasal, A.; Erdil, Y.Z.; Acar, M.; Kuşkun, T. Effects of the panel and fastener type on bending moment capacity of L-type joints for furniture cases. Pro Ligno 2015, 11, 426–443. [Google Scholar]
  65. Langová, N.; Joščák, P. Mechanical properties of Confirmat screws corner joints made of native wood and wood-based composites. For. Wood Technol. 2019, 105, 76–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Sydor, M.; Rogozinski, T.; Stuper-Szablewska, K.; Starczewski, K. The accuracy of holes drilled in the side surface of plywood. BioResources 2020, 15, 117–129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Sydor, M. Geometry of Wood Screws: A Patent Review. Eur. J. Wood. Prod. 2019, 77, 93–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  68. Máchová, E.; Langová, N.; Réh, R.; Joščák, P.; Krišťák, Ľ.; Holouš, Z.; Igaz, R.; Hitka, M. Effect of moisture content on the load carrying capacity and stiffness of corner wood-based and plastic joints. Bioresources 2019, 14, 8640–8655. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Sydor, M.; Majka, J.; Langova, N. Effective Diameters of Drilled Holes in Pinewwod in Response to Changes in Relative Humidity. Bioresources 2021, 16, 5407–5421. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Langova, N.; Beno, P.; Luptakova, J.; Fragassa, C. Stress concentration around circular and elliptic holes in wood laminates. FME Trans. 2020, 48, 102–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Machova, E.; Holous, Z.; Langova, N.; Balazova, Z. The effect of humidity on the shear strength of glued wood based and plastic joints. Acta Fac. Xylologiae 2018, 60, 113–120. [Google Scholar]
  72. Hitka, M.; Joscak, P.; Langova, N.; Kristak, L.; Blaskova, S. Load-carrying capacity and the size of chair joints determined for users with a higher body weight. Bioresources 2018, 13, 6428–6443. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Branowski, B.; Starczewski, K.; Zablocki, M.; Sydor, M. Design issues of innovative furniture fasteners for wood-based boards. BioResources 2020, 15, 8472–8495. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Sedliacikova, M.; Moresova, M.; Alac, P.; Drabek, J. How do behavioral aspects affect the financial decisions of managers and the competetitiveness of enterprises? J. Compet. 2021, 13, 99–116. [Google Scholar]
  75. Sedliacikova, M.; Strokova, Z.; Hitka, M.; Nagyova, N. Employees versus implementing controlling to the business practice. Entrep. Sustain. Issues 2020, 7, 1527–1540. [Google Scholar]
  76. Pirc Barčić, A.; Kitek Kuzman, M.; Vergot, T.; Grošelj, P. Monitoring Consumer Purchasing Behavior for Wood Furniture before and during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Forests 2021, 12, 873. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Ratnasingam, J.; Khoo, A.; Jegathesan, N.; Wei, L.C.; Latib, H.A.; Thanasegaran, G.; Liat, L.C.; Yi, L.Y.; Othman, K.; Amir, M.A. How are small and medium enterprises in Malaysia’s furniture industry coping with COVID–19 Pandemic? Early evidences from a survey and recommendations for policymakers. Bioresources 2020, 15, 5951–5964. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Materials 14 05064 g001 550
Figure 1. Multi-layer panel with a nominal thickness of 21 mm made of 7 layers of veneer and 6 layers of corrugated cardboard: 1. Rotary cut beech veneer, δ = 1.2 mm; 2. three-layer corrugated cardboard δн = 6 mm.
Figure 1. Multi-layer panel with a nominal thickness of 21 mm made of 7 layers of veneer and 6 layers of corrugated cardboard: 1. Rotary cut beech veneer, δ = 1.2 mm; 2. three-layer corrugated cardboard δн = 6 mm.
Materials 14 05064 g001
Materials 14 05064 g002 550
Figure 2. Multi-layer panel with a nominal thickness of 51 mm made of 13 layers of veneer and 12 layers of corrugated cardboard: 1. Rotary cut beech veneer, δ = 1.2 mm; 2. three-layer corrugated cardboard δн = 6 mm.
Figure 2. Multi-layer panel with a nominal thickness of 51 mm made of 13 layers of veneer and 12 layers of corrugated cardboard: 1. Rotary cut beech veneer, δ = 1.2 mm; 2. three-layer corrugated cardboard δн = 6 mm.
Materials 14 05064 g002
Materials 14 05064 g003 550
Figure 3. Cardboard honeycomb panel with a thickness of 50 mm, manufactured by Egger, Austria, δ = 50 mm: 1. Decorative foil; 2. PB, δ = 8 mm; 3. honeycomb cardboard core.
Figure 3. Cardboard honeycomb panel with a thickness of 50 mm, manufactured by Egger, Austria, δ = 50 mm: 1. Decorative foil; 2. PB, δ = 8 mm; 3. honeycomb cardboard core.
Materials 14 05064 g003
Materials 14 05064 g004 550
Figure 4. Corner joints made of lightweight panels: (a) Multi-layer panel (21 mm) made of veneer and corrugated cardboard, connected by a plastic corner connector and special screw Varianta; (b) multi-layer panel (21 mm) made of veneer and corrugated cardboard, connected by Confirmat ø7 × 70 mm; (c) multi-layer panel (21 mm) made of veneer and corrugated cardboard, connected by an eccentric connector Minifix; (d) multi-layer panel (21 mm) made of veneer and corrugated cardboard, connected by a dowel ø8 × 35 mm; (e) multi-layer panel (51 mm) made of veneer and corrugated cardboard, connected by a dowel ø12 × 50 mm; (f) multi-layer panel (51 mm) made of veneer and corrugated cardboard, connected by Rafix 20 HC, inserted longitudinally on the cardboard direction; (g) multi-layer panel (51 mm) made of veneer and corrugated cardboard, connected by Rafix 20 HC, inserted across on the cardboard direction; (h) cardboard honeycomb panel (50 mm) connected by plastic corner connector and special screw Varianta; (i) cardboard honeycomb panel (50 mm) connected by Rafix 20 HC; (j) cardboard honeycomb panel (50 mm) connected by TAB 20 HC.
Figure 4. Corner joints made of lightweight panels: (a) Multi-layer panel (21 mm) made of veneer and corrugated cardboard, connected by a plastic corner connector and special screw Varianta; (b) multi-layer panel (21 mm) made of veneer and corrugated cardboard, connected by Confirmat ø7 × 70 mm; (c) multi-layer panel (21 mm) made of veneer and corrugated cardboard, connected by an eccentric connector Minifix; (d) multi-layer panel (21 mm) made of veneer and corrugated cardboard, connected by a dowel ø8 × 35 mm; (e) multi-layer panel (51 mm) made of veneer and corrugated cardboard, connected by a dowel ø12 × 50 mm; (f) multi-layer panel (51 mm) made of veneer and corrugated cardboard, connected by Rafix 20 HC, inserted longitudinally on the cardboard direction; (g) multi-layer panel (51 mm) made of veneer and corrugated cardboard, connected by Rafix 20 HC, inserted across on the cardboard direction; (h) cardboard honeycomb panel (50 mm) connected by plastic corner connector and special screw Varianta; (i) cardboard honeycomb panel (50 mm) connected by Rafix 20 HC; (j) cardboard honeycomb panel (50 mm) connected by TAB 20 HC.
Materials 14 05064 g004
Materials 14 05064 g005 550
Figure 5. Type and dimensions of the tested samples. Reprinted with permission from Ref. [11]. 2021 BISMAR.
Figure 5. Type and dimensions of the tested samples. Reprinted with permission from Ref. [11]. 2021 BISMAR.
Materials 14 05064 g005
Materials 14 05064 g006 550
Figure 6. Test procedure. Reprinted with permission from Ref. [11]. 2021 BISMAR. (a) Type of loading of the tested samples; (b) determination of the bending arm.
Figure 6. Test procedure. Reprinted with permission from Ref. [11]. 2021 BISMAR. (a) Type of loading of the tested samples; (b) determination of the bending arm.
Materials 14 05064 g006
Materials 14 05064 g007 550
Figure 7. Test scheme and deformation under arm compression bending load of the test samples of end corner joints made of lightweight panels. Reprinted with permission from Ref. [11]. 2021 BISMAR. (a) Type of loading and dimensions of the tested samples; (b,c) scheme of loading and determination of the deformation of the tested samples.
Figure 7. Test scheme and deformation under arm compression bending load of the test samples of end corner joints made of lightweight panels. Reprinted with permission from Ref. [11]. 2021 BISMAR. (a) Type of loading and dimensions of the tested samples; (b,c) scheme of loading and determination of the deformation of the tested samples.
Materials 14 05064 g007
Materials 14 05064 g008 550
Figure 8. Bending strength under the compression test of L-type corner joints made of lightweight panels. The letter index of the type of joints is according to Figure 4.
Figure 8. Bending strength under the compression test of L-type corner joints made of lightweight panels. The letter index of the type of joints is according to Figure 4.
Materials 14 05064 g008
Materials 14 05064 g009 550
Figure 9. Stiffness coefficients under the compression test of L-type corner joints made of lightweight panels. The letter index of the type of joints is according to Figure 4.
Figure 9. Stiffness coefficients under the compression test of L-type corner joints made of lightweight panels. The letter index of the type of joints is according to Figure 4.
Materials 14 05064 g009
Table
Table 1. Thickness and density of the lightweight panels.
Table 1. Thickness and density of the lightweight panels.
Type of PanelThickness,
mm 		Density
kg/m3
1. Multi-layer panel, veneer (7 layers) and corrugated cardboard (6 layers)21466
2. Multi-layer panel, veneer (13 layers) and corrugated cardboard (12 layers)51349
3. Cardboard honeycomb panel50257
Table
Table 2. Bending moments of corner joints made of lightweight panels.
Table 2. Bending moments of corner joints made of lightweight panels.
Type of Joints 1No. of Test
Samples		Mean,
N∙m		Min.,
N∙m		Max.,
N∙m		Median,
N∙m		St. Dev.,
N∙m		Var. Coefficient
a157.286.108.227.250.640.09
b1510.539.2112.2510.290.820.08
c156.155.497.525.970.610.10
d1515.4114.2016.4115.420.620.04
e833.2225.3939.3333.464.010.12
f106.706.287.586.560.390.06
g77.906.708.597.890.560.07
h1421.6620.6623.5221.330.850.04
i158.106.689.918.090.870.11
j149.068.0510.348.990.590.07
1 The letter index of the type of joints is according to Figure 4.
Table
Table 3. Tukey HSD analysis of the differences between the groups with a confidence interval of 95% of bending capacity of joints of two materials of all pairwise comparisons.
Table 3. Tukey HSD analysis of the differences between the groups with a confidence interval of 95% of bending capacity of joints of two materials of all pairwise comparisons.
Index 1Type of JointBending Strength
N∙m		Lower Bound (95%)Upper Bound (95%)GH 2
eMulti-layer panel (51 mm) made of veneer and corrugated cardboard, connected by a dowel ø12 × 50 mm33.2232.3434.10A
hCardboard honeycomb panel (50 mm) connected by plastic corner connector and special screw Varianta21.6621.1322.18B
dMulti-layer panel (21 mm) made of veneer and corrugated cardboard, connected by a dowel ø8 × 35 mm15.4114.7616.05C
bMulti-layer panel (21 mm) made of veneer and corrugated cardboard, connected by Confirmat ø7 × 70 mm10.5310.0311.04D
jCardboard honeycomb panel (50 mm) connected by TAB 20 HC9.068.429.70DE
iCardboard honeycomb panel (50 mm) connected by Rafix 20 HC8.107.468.74EF
gMulti-layer panel (51 mm) made of veneer and corrugated cardboard, connected by Rafix 20 HC, inserted across on the cardboard direction7.906.968.41EFG
aMulti-layer panel (21 mm) made of veneer and corrugated cardboard, connected by a plastic corner connector and special screw Varianta7.286.337.91FG
fMulti-layer panel (51 mm) made of veneer and corrugated cardboard, connected by Rafix 20 HC, inserted longitudinally on the cardboard direction6.705.907.56FG
cMulti-layer panel (21 mm) made of veneer and corrugated cardboard, connected by an eccentric connector Minifix6.155.646.65G
1 The letter index of the type of joints is according to Figure 4. 2 Groups of homogeneities (α = 0.05).
Table
Table 4. Stiffness coefficients of corner joints made of lightweight panels.
Table 4. Stiffness coefficients of corner joints made of lightweight panels.
Type of Joints 1No. of Test SamplesMean,
N∙m/Rad		Min.,
N∙m/Rad		Max.,
N∙M/Rad		Median,
N∙M/Rad		St. Dev.,
N∙m/Rad		Var.
Coefficient
a1549.1936.6861.4048.775.430.11
b1540.2827.8157.1440.097.830.19
c1542.7227.4665.3241.2310.560.25
d15111.0292.99134.05110.479.920.09
e8153.61117.33200.91139.0331.410.20
f1081.2756.86102.0781.7711.620.14
g783.7642.50134.6684.6928.590.34
h14327.34267.24419.56321.3339.260.12
i15224.61117.49342.42215.0158.870.26
j15194.71157.93245.26188.0624.970.13
1 The letter index of the type of joints is according to Figure 4.
Table
Table 5. Tukey HSD analysis of the differences between the groups with a confidence interval of 95% of stiffness coefficients of joints of two materials of all pairwise comparisons.
Table 5. Tukey HSD analysis of the differences between the groups with a confidence interval of 95% of stiffness coefficients of joints of two materials of all pairwise comparisons.
Index 1Type of JointStiffness Coeff. c,
N∙m/rad		Lower Bound (95%)
N∙m/rad		Upper Bound (95%)
N∙m/rad		GH 2
hCardboard honeycomb panel (50 mm) connected by a plastic corner connector and special screw Varianta327311.79342.89A
iCardboard honeycomb panel (50 mm) connected by Rafix 20 HC225209.59239.64B
jCardboard honeycomb panel (50 mm) connected by TAB 20 HC195177.58208.68BC
eMulti-layer panel (51 mm) made of veneer and corrugated cardboard, connected by a dowel ø12 × 50 mm154133.04174.19C
dMulti-layer panel (21 mm) made of veneer and corrugated cardboard, connected by a dowel ø8 × 35 mm11196.00126.05D
gMulti-layer panel (51 mm) made of veneer and corrugated cardboard, connected by Rafix 20 HC, inserted across on the cardboard direction8461.77105.76DE
fMulti-layer panel (51 mm) made of veneer and corrugated cardboard, connected by Rafix 20 HC, inserted longitudinally on the cardboard direction8162.8799.67DE
aMulti-layer panel (21 mm) made of veneer and corrugated cardboard, connected by a plastic corner connector and special screw Varianta4934.1764.21EF
cMulti-layer panel (21 mm) made of veneer and corrugated cardboard, connected by an eccentric connector Minifix4327.7057.74EF
bMulti-layer panel (21 mm) made of veneer and corrugated cardboard, connected by Confirmat ø7 × 70 mm4025.2655.31E
1 The letter index of the type of joints is according to Figure 4. 2 Groups of homogeneities (α = 0.05).
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Jivkov, V.; Simeonova, R.; Antov, P.; Marinova, A.; Petrova, B.; Kristak, L. Structural Application of Lightweight Panels Made of Waste Cardboard and Beech Veneer. Materials 2021, 14, 5064. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma14175064

AMA Style

Jivkov V, Simeonova R, Antov P, Marinova A, Petrova B, Kristak L. Structural Application of Lightweight Panels Made of Waste Cardboard and Beech Veneer. Materials. 2021; 14(17):5064. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma14175064

Chicago/Turabian Style

Jivkov, Vassil, Ralitsa Simeonova, Petar Antov, Assia Marinova, Boryana Petrova, and Lubos Kristak. 2021. "Structural Application of Lightweight Panels Made of Waste Cardboard and Beech Veneer" Materials 14, no. 17: 5064. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma14175064

APA Style

Jivkov, V., Simeonova, R., Antov, P., Marinova, A., Petrova, B., & Kristak, L. (2021). Structural Application of Lightweight Panels Made of Waste Cardboard and Beech Veneer. Materials, 14(17), 5064. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma14175064

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop