Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Formaldehyde Emission

    Uploaded by

    Somen Das
    20 views1 page
    This document compares different standard test methods for measuring formaldehyde emissions from wood-based building materials: the chamber method, gas analysis method, flash method, perforator method, and Japanese desiccator and small chamber methods. The results can vary between methods due to differences in test conditions like edge sealing, sample conditioning, and test temperature. For particleboards, the Japanese limit of 0.5 mg/L in the desiccator method is equivalent to 0.31 mg/m2 in the chamber test and 3.8 mg per 100 g in the perforator test. Variations between laboratories are larger than within laboratories, with coefficients of variation of 10-30% for the chamber method, 30-50% for the

    Original Description:

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    This document compares different standard test methods for measuring formaldehyde emissions from wood-based building materials: the chamber method, gas analysis method, flash method, perforator method, and Japanese desiccator and small chamber methods. The results can vary between methods due to differences in test conditions like edge sealing, sample conditioning, and test temperature. For particleboards, the Japanese limit of 0.5 mg/L in the desiccator method is equivalent to 0.31 mg/m2 in the chamber test and 3.8 mg per 100 g in the perforator test. Variations between laboratories are larger than within laboratories, with coefficients of variation of 10-30% for the chamber method, 30-50% for the

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as doc, pdf, or txt
    20 views1 page

    Formaldehyde Emission

    Uploaded by

    Somen Das
    This document compares different standard test methods for measuring formaldehyde emissions from wood-based building materials: the chamber method, gas analysis method, flash method, perforator method, and Japanese desiccator and small chamber methods. The results can vary between methods due to differences in test conditions like edge sealing, sample conditioning, and test temperature. For particleboards, the Japanese limit of 0.5 mg/L in the desiccator method is equivalent to 0.31 mg/m2 in the chamber test and 3.8 mg per 100 g in the perforator test. Variations between laboratories are larger than within laboratories, with coefficients of variation of 10-30% for the chamber method, 30-50% for the

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as doc, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    Formaldehyde emissionComparison of different standard methods

    References and further reading may be available for this article. To view references and
    further reading you must purchase this article.
    Maria Risholm-Sundmana, , , Annelise Larsenb, wa !estina and Anders "eibulla
    a#asco Adhesives A$, %.&. $o' (()*+, S-(,,-( Stoc.holm, Sweden
    b/0A of Sweden A$, *1* +( 2lmhult, Sweden
    Received (- March 3,,-4 revised 5 &ctober 3,,-4 accepted (6 &ctober 3,,-. Available
    online 3* 7anuary 3,,6.
    Abstract
    The emission of formaldehyde is an important factor in the evaluation of the
    environmental and health effects of wood-based board materials. This article gives a
    comparison between commonly used uropean test methods8 chamber method 9: 6(6-
    (, 3,,1. "ood-based panels;determination of formaldehyde release;%art (8
    formaldehyde emission by the chamber method. uropean Standard, &ctober 3,,1<, gas
    analysis method 9: 6(6-3, (551. "ood-based panels;determination of formaldehyde
    release;%art 38 formaldehyde release by the gas analysis method, uropean Standard,
    :ovember (551<, flas. method 9: 6(6-*, (55-. "ood-based panels;determination of
    formaldehyde release;%art *8 formaldehyde release by the flas. method, uropean
    Standard, March (55-<, perforator method 9: (3,, (55*. "ood based panels;
    determination of formaldehyde content;e'traction method called perforator method,
    uropean Standard, September (55*<, 7apanese test methods8 desiccator methods 97/S A
    (1-,, 3,,(. $uilding boards. =etermination of formaldehyde emission;desiccator
    method, 7apanese /ndustrial Standard, March 3,,( and 7AS MA>> 3**, 3,,(< and small
    chamber method 97/S A (5,(, 3,,*. =etermination of the emission of volatile organic
    compounds and aldehydes for building products;small chamber method, 7apanese
    /ndustrial Standard, 7anuary 3,,*<, for solid wood, particleboard, plywood and medium
    density fiberboard.
    The variations between the results from different methods can partly be e'plained by
    differences in test conditions. >actors li.e edge sealing, conditioning of the sample before
    the test and test temperature have a large effect on the final emission result. The 7apanese
    limit for > ???? of ,.* mg l@( Ain desiccatorB for particleboards was found to be
    eCuivalent to ,.,1 mg m@* in the uropean chamber test and 3.+ mg per (,, g in the
    perforator test. The variations in inter-laboratory tests are much larger than in intra-
    laboratory tests4 the coefficient of variation is (-D and -.,D for the chamber method,
    3)D and *.)D for the gas analysis method and ()D and ).3D for the desiccator method.
    0eywords8 mission testing4 >ormaldehyde4 #hamber4 $uilding materials4 "ood4
    %articleboard4 "ood-based boards

    You might also like