000111675 001__ 111675
000111675 005__ 20240319080953.0
000111675 0247_ $$2doi$$a10.3390/f13020167
000111675 0248_ $$2sideral$$a127506
000111675 037__ $$aART-2022-127506
000111675 041__ $$aeng
000111675 100__ $$aSepliarsky, Fernando
000111675 245__ $$aModeling of falling ball impact test response on solid, veneer, and traditional engineered wood floorings of several hardwoods
000111675 260__ $$c2022
000111675 5060_ $$aAccess copy available to the general public$$fUnrestricted
000111675 5203_ $$aHardness is a key mechanical property of flooring materials. In this study, the performance of veneer floorings (with a top layer thickness of 0.6 mm) was investigated by dynamic hardness tests, comparing it with those of traditional engineered wood floorings (with a top layer thickness of 3 mm) and solid wood floorings. Two hardwoods commonly used on wood flooring, viz. Quercus robur L. and Hymenaea courbaril L., and two fast-growing hardwoods, Eucalyptus globulus Labill. and Eucalyptus grandis W. Hill ex Maiden, were tested as top layers. To compare their usage properties, a dynamic impact hardness test involving steel balls with three diameters and five different drop heights was carried out, measuring the footprint diameter (FD) and the indentation depth (ID). The data from 4800 impacts, corresponding to 180 different individual groups (4 hardwood species × 3 ball diameters × 5 drop heights × 3 floor types) were analyzed. The results showed that the general response in terms of both FD and ID was better in the engineered wood floorings than in solid wood floorings, and that the veneer floorings (0.6 mm) showed better behavior than traditional engineered wood floorings (3.0 mm). Furthermore, for the veneer floorings, the two fast-growing hardwood species tested, which have significantly different densities, showed similar behavior to traditional hardwoods, suggesting that they would be suitable for valorization in the wood flooring industry.
000111675 540__ $$9info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess$$aby$$uhttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/es/
000111675 590__ $$a2.9$$b2022
000111675 592__ $$a0.65$$b2022
000111675 591__ $$aFORESTRY$$b17 / 69 = 0.246$$c2022$$dQ1$$eT1
000111675 593__ $$aForestry$$c2022$$dQ1
000111675 594__ $$a4.5$$b2022
000111675 655_4 $$ainfo:eu-repo/semantics/article$$vinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
000111675 700__ $$aAcuña, Luis
000111675 700__ $$aBalmori, José-Antonio
000111675 700__ $$aMartínez, Roberto D.
000111675 700__ $$aSpavento, Eleana
000111675 700__ $$aKeil, Gabriel
000111675 700__ $$aCasado, Milagros
000111675 700__ $$0(orcid)0000-0003-2713-2786$$aMartín-Ramos, Pablo$$uUniversidad de Zaragoza
000111675 7102_ $$15011$$2500$$aUniversidad de Zaragoza$$bDpto. CC.Agrar.y Medio Natural$$cArea Ingeniería Agroforestal
000111675 773__ $$g13, 2 (2022), 167 [14 pp.]$$pForests$$tForests$$x1999-4907
000111675 8564_ $$s5195314$$uhttps://zaguan.unizar.es/record/111675/files/texto_completo.pdf$$yVersión publicada
000111675 8564_ $$s2761453$$uhttps://zaguan.unizar.es/record/111675/files/texto_completo.jpg?subformat=icon$$xicon$$yVersión publicada
000111675 909CO $$ooai:zaguan.unizar.es:111675$$particulos$$pdriver
000111675 951__ $$a2024-03-18-13:17:35
000111675 980__ $$aARTICLE