Next Article in Journal
Efficient I/O Performance-Focused Scheduling in High-Performance Computing
Previous Article in Journal
Image Dehazing Enhancement Strategy Based on Polarization Detection of Space Targets
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Applied Sciences
Volume 14
Issue 21
10.3390/app142110044
applsci-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
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

The Influences of Selected Factors on Bending Moment Capacity of Case Furniture Joints

by
Wengang Hu
1,2,*,
Yuan Zhao
2,
Wei Xu
2 and
Yuanqiang Liu
3,*
1
Co-Innovation Center of Efficient Processing and Utilization of Forest Resources, Nanjing Forestry University, Nanjing 210037, China
2
College of Furnishing and Industrial Design, Nanjing Forestry University, Nanjing 210037, China
3
Dehua TB New Decoration Material Co., Ltd., Huzhou 313200, China
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Appl. Sci. 2024, 14(21), 10044; https://doi.org/10.3390/app142110044
Submission received: 3 September 2024 / Revised: 24 October 2024 / Accepted: 29 October 2024 / Published: 4 November 2024
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
This study experimentally investigated the effects of selected factors on the bending moment capacity (BMC) of case furniture joints. The main aim was to explore mixed applications of wood-based materials and fasteners in manufacturing case furniture to reduce material costs. The study examined the effects of the face member material—particle board (PB), plywood (PL), and block board (BB)—edge member material (PB, PL, and BB), and joint shape (T-shape and L-shape) on BMC. Additionally, the study evaluated the effects of joint type (two eccentrics (TE), two dowels (TD), and one eccentric and one dowel (ED)), and material type (PB, PL, and BB) on BMC for L-shaped joints. The results showed that joint shape and face member material significantly affected the BMC of case furniture joint. The BMCs of T-shaped joints were significantly greater than those of L-shaped joints, regardless of the material of the face and edge members, except when the face member was made of PL. For L-shaped joints with PL face members, the BMCs were significantly higher compared to others. Joints constructed with TE exhibited significantly higher BMC compared to ED and TD for the same material type. For PB, TE joints exhibited an increase of approximately 3.0 Nm and 2.0 Nm compared to TD and ED, respectively. For PL, TE showed an increase of 9.1 Nm and 4.1 Nm compared to ED and TD, respectively. For BB, the increases were 7.0 Nm and 6.6 Nm compared to ED and TD. The BMC of joints made with PL and constructed with TE and ED was significantly greater than those of BB, followed by PB. However, for joints assembled with TD, there was no significant difference among the three materials. The ratios of BMC for joints constructed with ED compared to the half-sum of TE and TD were 0.73, 1.04, and 0.79 for PB, PL, and BB, respectively. These results suggest that the face member material predominantly influences the BMC of case furniture joints, indicating the potential to reduce costs by combining different materials and joint types.

1. Introduction

Case furniture is a common furniture type characterized by its structural design [1,2,3]. In modern furniture manufacturing, case furniture offers notable advantages in intelligent manufacturing over traditional wood frame furniture, thanks to its standardized components and fasteners [4,5,6], as well as sustainable modular design [7,8]. Previous literature has primarily focused on factors that influence the structural strength of case furniture.
It is well-known that various factors can affect the structural strength of case furniture, including material type, fastener type, load type, number of fasteners, and their interactions. Consequently, ensuring the reliability of case furniture joints is a crucial issue that requires consideration of various joint techniques [9]. Regarding the impact of material type on case furniture strength, commonly used materials commonly include particle board [10], plywood [11,12], block board [13,14], medium-density fiberboard (MDF) [15,16,17], and OSB [18]. Previous studies have shown that the strength of these materials significantly influences joint strength. For instance, joints constructed with plywood have been found to be stronger than those made with block board, MDF, or particle board [10,19,20]. Regarding the effect of fastener type on joint strength, the fasteners commonly used in case furniture construction include Minifix (eccentric) [21,22], biscuits [23,24], screws [25,26], auxetic dowels [27], nails [28], and staples [29]. Fastener type greatly affects joint strength, and an interaction effect exists between fastener type and material type on joint strength [30,31,32,33,34,35]. With respect to load type, common methods for evaluating joint strength include bending load, diagonal compression, and tension tests [21,30,31,36,37]. Bending load capacity and strength parameters are often used as indicators of joint strength. For a given joint, diagonal tension results are generally higher than those for diagonal compression [21,36,37]. Research has also examined the influence of fastener quantity in case furniture joints, such as the number of dowels [38,39,40] and screws [41]. To optimize joint techniques, studies have further explored spacing and gluing type. Results indicate that joint strength increases with additional fasteners. Additional studies have investigated end distance [42,43] and gluing type [23,31,44,45,46] for joints, showing that a smaller end distance reduces joint strength; commonly used glue includes PVAc.
Although previous studies have examined the effects of wood-based material and fastener type on bending moment capacity (BMC), they typically used the same material for both face and edge members. The mixed use of different wood-based materials for face and edge members has not been investigated. Furthermore, the relationship between the BMC of eccentric fittings and wood dowels has yet to be examined. Therefore, this study aims to address these gaps by investigating the effects of material type for face and edge members, and joint shape, on the BMC of case furniture joints. Additionally, the contributions of eccentric fittings and wood dowels to BMC are analyzed by examining the effects of joint type and material type on the BMC of L-shaped joints.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Materials

The wood-based panels used in this study were particle board (PB), Plywood (PL), and block board (BB) provided by Dehua TB New Decoration Material Co., Ltd. (Huzhou, China). The full-size panels measured 1220 × 2440 × 18 mm (width × length × thickness). Table 1 shows the air-dry densities and moisture contents of the evaluated materials measured according to the GB/T 17657-2022 [47].
The fasteners used in this study were eccentric fitting and wood dowel sponsored by Hettich Shanghai branch (Shanghai, China). Figure 1 shows the dimensions of eccentric fitting, including cam, bolt, and socket. The wood dowel is made of eucalyptus (Eucalyptus crebra F. V. Muell.). Its dimensions are 40 mm × 8 mm (length × diameter).

2.2. Experimental Design

2.2.1. Material Type of Members and Joint Shape Effects on BMC

A complete three-factor 2 × 3 × 3 factorial experiment was designed to investigate effects of joint shape, face member material, and edge member material on bending moment capacity (BMC) of case furniture joints. The joint shape includes T-shape and L-shape. The face and edge members are made of PB, PL, and BB. The experimental arrangement of the study includes 18 test groups with 7 replications for each. There are totally 126 tests were conducted.

2.2.2. Joint Type and Materials Type Effects on BMC of L-Shaped Joints

A complete two-factor 3 × 3 factorial experiment with 7 replications was designed to investigate effects of joint type and material type on BMC of L-shaped joints. The joint type includes two eccentric fittings (TE), two dowels (TD), and one eccentric fitting and a dowel (ED). The material type includes PB, PL, and BB. Here, the face member and edge member were made of the identical wood-based material. This test includes 9 combinations with 7 replications for each. Therefore, 63 tests were conducted.

2.3. Experimental Procedure

2.3.1. Sample Preparation

Figure 2 shows the dimensions of samples for conducting tests. First, the full-size (2440 × 1220 × 18 mm) wood-based panel was cut into strip with dimensions of 2440 × 80 × 18 mm. These strips were cut into small pieces of panels with dimensions of 180 × 80 × 18 mm, 150 × 80 × 18 mm, and 130 × 80 × 18 mm for manufacturing L-shaped and T-shaped samples. Finally, planning holes on these small panels were drilled according to the jointing technique. Figure 2c only shows the planning holes using ED to assemble face and edge members. The joints constructed by TE and TD can refer to this joint technique. Totally 189 samples were prepared.

2.3.2. Test Method

Figure 3 presents the setup used to measure the BMC of case furniture joints with a universal testing machine (AG-X 20 kN, SHIMDZU, Kioto, Japan). The distance between the load point and joint was set at 90 mm. The load rate was 10 mm/min controlled by displacement. The test machine output the load–deflection curve and maximum load values, while a camera recorded the failure modes of all samples. BMC was calculated using Equation (1).
M = P × L
where M is bending moment capacity in N·m; P is maximum load in N; and L is distance between load point and joint in m.

2.4. Statistical Analysis

All investigated effects were analyzed using the analysis of variance (ANOVA) general linear model (GLM) procedure. Mean comparisons using the protected least significant difference (LSD) multiple comparison procedure were performed if any significant interaction was identified. Otherwise, main effects were concluded. All statistical analyses were performed at the 5% significance level using SPSS (version 22, IBM, Amonk, NY, USA).

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Effects of Joint Shape and Members’ Material Type on BMC of Joints

3.1.1. Typical Load–Deflection Curve and Failure Modes of Joints

Figure 4 shows three typical load–deflection curves for joints based on their failure modes. For the L-shaped joint with PB as the face member, the face member’s end was completely ripped off along with the inserted socket. However, the wood dowel was withdrawn without notable damage to the face member’s end or to the dowel itself, as the dowel was only used for positioning and was not glued. In the case of the T-PL-PB, some samples failed due to edge member splitting, as the socket’s withdrawal strength in the plywood was high enough to resist the tensile component applied to the edge member. However, the compressive load component exceeded the bolt-bearing strength of PB. Additionally, for other tested combinations, the load–deflection curves were nearly identical, as their failures were mainly caused by sockets being withdrawn from the face members.
Figure 5 further shows the failure modes of each combination of joints with different materials used in face member and edge member. For L-shaped joints, all samples failed resulting from end rip of face member at the corner of eccentric joints. By contrast, for T-shaped samples, most samples failed rest with the withdrawal of sockets in face members, except for T-PL-PB.

3.1.2. Comparisons of Joint Shape and Material Type Effects on BMC of Joints

Figure 6 shows the BMCs of all evaluated combinations. It indicates distributions of all data, including mean, median, minimum and maximum values. It can be seen that, for L-shaped samples, the joints with PL as face member material had a significantly higher mean BMC than those with PB and BB. For T-shaped joints, this trend persisted. However, the difference among each type of face member was less than those of L-shaped samples. Regarding the edge member, no noticeable differences were observed across each type for a given face member. The variations in minimum and maximum BMCs also differed across combinations.
Table 2 shows the three-way ANOVA results of BMC of case furniture joint. It indicated that joint shape, face member, and their interactions have significant effects on the BMC of joints. Therefore, further comparisons needed to be conducted. However, the effect of edge member and its interactions with other factors were not significant.
Table 3 summarizes the BMCs of joints for each combination of face member, edge member materials, and joint shape. For joint shape, BMCs of T-shaped joints were significantly greater than those of L-shaped joints regardless of face and edge member materials, except for cases where the face member was made of PL. This also aligned with previous findings that end distance significantly influences joint strength [42,43]. Regarding face member material, for L-shaped joints, the BMCs of joints with PL as the face member were significantly higher than those with BB, followed by PB. However, for T-shaped joints, the BMCs with face member made of PL and BB were significantly higher than those of PB, with no significant difference between PL and BB. These results indicate that face member materials primarily determine the BMCs of joints, especially for L-shaped joints, as the failure mode of L-shaped joints was ripping at the end of the face member.

3.2. Effects of Material Type and Joint Type on BMC

3.2.1. Typical Load and Deflection Curve and Failure Modes

Figure 7 shows typical load–deflection curves and corresponding failure modes of L-shaped joints when subjected to bending load. For joints constructed by TE, all samples failed result in the face member ripped at two joints. In case of the joints connected by TD, the fractures of wood dowels were main reason. No notable damage to of face and edge member. Therefore, the load–deflection curves of joint connected by TD were identical regardless of materials. For joints constructed by ED, the joints mainly failed rest with fracture of wood dowel and rip of face member.

3.2.2. Comparisons of BMC Considering Joint Type and Material Type

Figure 8 shows the data distributions of BMCs of L-shaped joints constructed by various joint types and materials. It was observed that the joint made of PL and BB constructed by TE was much higher than others. The BMC of joints constructed by TE tended to be greater than others made of the same materials. Additionally, for the same joint type, the BMCs of joint made of PL were still higher than those of BB followed by PB. Concerning joints made of BB, the median line is higher than mean values and variations are higher than others. This indicates the solid wood core causes high variations.
Table 4 shows the ANOVA results of material type and joint type effects on BMC of L-shaped joints. It indicated that the material type, joint type, and their interactions all had significant effects on BMC of L-shaped joints. Therefore, two-way post comparisons were further conducted using LSD.
Table 5 presents the comparison of BMCs constructed by each combination of material type and joint type. It suggested that, for material type, the BMCs of joints made of PL constructed by TE and ED were significantly greater than those of BB followed by PB. However, for BMC joints assembled by TD, there was no significant difference among three types of materials, since all samples failed because of wood dowel fracture. In case of the joint type, for all evaluated materials, the joints constructed by TE were significantly greater higher than those of ED followed by TD.
Based on this assumption, the BMC of joints constructed with ED should equal half the sum of those constructed with TE and TD. To verify this assumption, the ratio of BMCs of joints constructed with ED to half the sum of TE and TD was calculated (Table 5). The results showed that only joints made of PL conformed to this assumption, with a ratio of 1.04. Joints made of PB and BB were overestimated by this assumption, with ratios of 0.73 and 0.79, respectively. These findings suggest that the assumption is more accurate when the material used is sufficiently strong. Otherwise, the materials may fail before joint fracture, resulting in lower BMCs. Thus, it is feasible to apply mixed wood-based panels, using high-strength material for the face member, and to combine eccentric fittings and wood dowels for cost-effective case furniture with satisfactory strength.

4. Conclusions

In this study, the bending moment capacity (BMC) of case furniture joints was investigated, focusing on the effects of face and edge member material types, and joint shape. Additionally, the BMCs of joints constructed with two eccentric fittings (TE), two dowels (TD), and one eccentric fitting and one dowel (ED) were compared and analyzed. The following conclusions were drawn:
(1)
Joint shape, face member material, and joint type significantly influenced the BMC of case furniture joints, while the edge member material had no significant effect.
(2)
The BMC of joints constructed with TE was significantly higher than those with ED, followed by TD. The ratios of the BMC of joints with ED to half the sum of TE and TD were 1.04, 0.73 and 0.79 for joints made of PL, PB, and BB, respectively.
(3)
The face member material primarily determined the BMC of joints, indicating the potential for cost savings by using mixed materials in case furniture manufacturing.
(4)
Variability in the experimental results was primarily attributed to the characteristics of block board (BB), which has a solid wood core. This core introduces fluctuations in mechanical properties due to variations in moisture content, density, and natural defects, resulting in greater discrepancies in BMCs for joints with block board compared to those with engineered wood products.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, W.H., Y.L. and W.X.; methodology, W.H.; software, Y.Z.; validation, Y.Z. and Y.L.; formal analysis, W.H.; investigation, Y.Z. and W.H.; resources, W.H.; data curation, Y.Z.; writing—original draft preparation, W.H. and Y.Z.; writing—review and editing, W.H., Y.L. and W.X.; supervision, W.H.; funding acquisition, W.H. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This work was partially supported by the Scientific Research Foundation of Metasequoia Teacher (Funder: Nanjing Forestry University, Funding Number: 163104060).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Xiaoqing Ye from Hettich Shanghai branch for providing the fasteners used in this study.

Conflicts of Interest

Author Yuanqiang Liu was employed by Dehua TB New Decoration Material Co., Ltd. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

References

  1. Zhu, L.; Qi, X.; Song, W. Research advances and prospects of intelligent technologies in the Chinese wood-based panel manufacturing. J. For. Eng. 2023, 8, 1–12. [Google Scholar]
  2. Wang, C.; Zhang, C.; Zhu, Y. Reverse design and additive manufacturing of furniture protective foot covers. BioResources 2024, 19, 4670–4678. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Xu, X.; Xiong, X.; Yue, X.; Zhang, M. A parametric optimized method for three-dimensional corner joints in wooden furniture. Forests 2023, 14, 1063. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Zhu, L.; Yan, Y.; Lv, J. A bibliometric analysis of current knowledge structure and research progress related to sustainable furniture design systems. Sustainability 2023, 15, 8622. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Zhang, Z.; Zhu, J.; Qi, Q. Research on the recyclable design of wooden furniture based on the recyclability evaluation. Sustainability 2023, 15, 16758. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Chen, Y.; Xu, Z. Research on the evaluation model for the tactile feel of custom wardrobe furniture finishes. BioResources 2024, 19, 5262–5287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Zhang, J.; Chen, Y. Research on color and texture characteristics and visual perception of custom wardrobe finishes. BioResources 2024, 19, 5109–5128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Zhou, C.; Zhang, Z.; Huang, T.; Gu, W.; Kaner, J. A bibliometric analysis of interaction interface aging research: From 2003 to 2022. Sage Open 2024, 14, 21582440241252225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Kłos, R.; Langová, N. Determination of reliability of selected case furniture constructions. Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 4587. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Yuksel, M.; Yildirim, N.; Kasal, A.; Erdil, Y.Z.; Demirci, S. Effect of the panel type and panel thickness on moment resistance of screw-jointed corner joints and stiffness of four-member cabinets. BioResources 2014, 9, 6340–6349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Wu, S.S.; Zhou, J.C.; Xu, W. A convenient approach to manufacturing lightweight and high-sound-insulation plywood using furfuryl alcohol/multilayer graphene oxide as a shielding layer. Wood Mater. Sci. Eng. 2024, 19, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Luo, Z.; Xu, W.; Wu, S. Performances of green velvet material (PLON) used in upholstered furniture. BioResources 2023, 18, 5108–5119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Zhu, J.; Niu, J. Green material characteristics applied to office desk furniture. BioResources 2022, 17, 2228–2242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Fu, Y.; Chen, J. Reversibly photochromic wood constructed by electric field-assisted self-assembled chitosan and tungsten trioxidecoatings. Wood Mater. Sci. Eng. 2024, 19, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Zou, Y.; Xia, Y.; Yan, X. Effects of compound use of two UV coating microcapsules on the physicochemical, optical, mechanical, and self-healing performance of coatings on fiberboard surfaces. Coatings 2024, 14, 1012. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Zou, Y.; Xia, Y.; Yan, X. Effect of UV top coating microcapsules on the coating properties of fiberboard surfaces. Polymers 2024, 16, 2098. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Hang, J.; Yan, X.; Li, J. A review on the effect of wood surface modification on paint film adhesion properties. Coatings 2024, 14, 1313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Li, D.; Li, W.; Mei, C. The relationship of bending strength, deformation and VDP of OSB. J. For. Eng. 2023, 8, 52–57. [Google Scholar]
  19. Petrova, B.; Jivkov, V.; Yavorov, N. Possibilities for efficient furniture construction made of thin and ultra-thin materials by using mitre joints. Materials 2023, 16, 6855. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Norvydas, V.; Baltrušaitis, A.; Juodeikienė, I. Investigation of miter corner joint strength of case furniture from particleboard. Mater. Sci. 2012, 18, 352–357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Yerlikaya, N.Ç.; Aktaş, A. Enhancement of load-carrying capacity of corner joints in case-type furniture. Mater. Des. 2012, 37, 393–401. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Kłos, R.; Fabisiak, B.; Ng, H.K.T. Comparative reliability analysis of selected joints for case furniture. BioResources 2018, 13, 5111–5123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Tankut, A.N.; Tankut, N. Effect of some factors on the strength of furniture corner joints constructed with wood biscuits. Turk. J. Agric. For. 2004, 28, 301–309. [Google Scholar]
  24. Kociszewski, M. Stiffness and load capacity of biscuit corner joints. Folia For. Pol. 2005, 36, 39–47. [Google Scholar]
  25. Uysal, M.; Tasdemir, C.; Memis, D. Effect of epoxy resin reinforcement on screw withdrawal strength of fiberboard and particleboard used in furniture industry. Drv. Ind. 2023, 74, 491–500. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Kasal, A.; Erdil, Y.Z.; Zhang, J.; Efe, H.; Avci, E. Estimation equations for moment resistances of L-type screw corner joints in case goods furniture. For. Prod. J. 2008, 58, 21–27. [Google Scholar]
  27. Kasal, A.; Smardzewski, J.; Kuşkun, T.; Güray, E. Analyses of L-type corner joints connected with auxetic dowels for case furniture. Materials 2023, 16, 4547. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Chen, G.; Wang, C.; Wu, J.; Zhang, E.; Wu, D. Mechanical performance of nailed connections between laminated bamboo lumber and oriented strand board. J. For. Eng. 2023, 8, 75–81. [Google Scholar]
  29. Miao, Y.; Pan, S.; Xu, W. Staple holding strength of furniture frame joints constructed of plywood and solid wood. Forests 2022, 13, 2006. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. 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]
  31. Tankut, A.N.; Tankut, N. Investigations the effects of fastener, glue, and composite material types on the strength of corner joints in case-type furniture construction. Mater. Des. 2009, 30, 4175–4182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Zhu, Y.; Wang, Y.; Yan, X. The effects of urea-formaldehyde resin-coated Toddalia asiatica (L.) Lam extract microcapsules on the properties of surface coatings for poplar wood. Coatings 2024, 14, 1011. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Śmietańska, K.; Mielczarek, M. Strength properties of furniture corner joints constructed with different wooden connectors and wood-based materials. Ann. Wars. Univ. Life Sci. SGGW For. Wood Technol. 2022, 118, 55–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Deng, J.; Ding, T.; Yan, X. Effect of two pomelo peel flavonoid microcapsules on the performance of waterborne coatings on the surface of poplar boards. Coatings 2024, 14, 937. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Sydor, M.; Kwapich, A.; Pohl, P. Strength comparative analysis of furniture joints made of various materials. Ann. WULS-SGGW For. Wood Technol. 2021, 113, 89–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Atar, M.; Ozcifci, A.; Altinok, M.; Celikel, U. Determination of diagonal compression and tension performances for case furniture corner joints constructed with wood biscuits. Mater. Des. 2009, 30, 665–670. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Maleki, S.; Haftkhani, A.R.; Dalvand, M.; Faezipour, M.; Tajvidi, M. Bending moment resistance of corner joints constructed with spline under diagonal tension and compression. J. For. Res. 2012, 23, 481–490. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Džincic, I.; Palija, T.; Miric-Milosavljevic, M.; Mihailovic, V. Size and character of the loads in corner joints within storage furniture. Wood Res. 2017, 62, 451–458. [Google Scholar]
  39. Zhang, J.L.; Eckelman, C.A. The bending moment resistance of single-dowel corner joints in case construction. For. Prod. J. 1993, 43, 19. [Google Scholar]
  40. Zhang, J.L.; Eckelman, C.A. Rational design of multi-dowel corner joints in case construction. For. Prod. J. 1993, 43, 52–58. [Google Scholar]
  41. Liu, W.; Eckelman, C.A. Effect of number of fasteners on the strength of corner joints for cases. For. Prod. J. 1998, 48, 93–95. [Google Scholar]
  42. Karaman, A. The effects of wooden dowel species and the end distance of miniflex fastener on the shear force capacity for h-type furniture joints. Wood Fiber Sci. 2024, 5, 1–8. [Google Scholar]
  43. Simek, M.; Haviarova, E.; Eckelman, C.A. The effect of end distance and number of ready-to-assemble furniture fasteners on bending moment resistance of corner joints. Wood Fiber Sci. 2010, 42, 92–98. [Google Scholar]
  44. Lin, Q.; Zhang, X.; Zhu, N.; Kusumah, S.S.; Umemura, K.; Zhao, Z. Preparation and investigation of an eco-friendly plywood adhesive composed of sucrose and ammonium polyphosphate. Wood Mater. Sci. Eng. 2023, 18, 1202–1211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Zhu, Y.; Wang, Y.; Yan, X. Preparation of chitosan-coated Toddalia asiatica (L.) Lam extract microcapsules and its effect on coating antibacterial properties. Coatings 2024, 14, 942. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Wang, Y.; Yan, X. Preparation of Toddalia asiatica (L.) Lam. extract microcapsules and their effect on optical, mechanical and antibacterial performance of waterborne topcoat paint films. Coatings 2024, 14, 655. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. CNS GB/T 17657; Test Methods of Evaluating the Properties of Wood-Based Panels and Surface Decorated Wood-Based Panels. Chinese National Standard: Beijing, China, 2022. (In Chinese)
Applsci 14 10044 g001
Figure 1. Dimensions of eccentric fitting including socket, bolt, and cam.
Figure 1. Dimensions of eccentric fitting including socket, bolt, and cam.
Applsci 14 10044 g001
Applsci 14 10044 g002
Figure 2. Dimensions of L-shaped (a), T-shaped (b), and planning holes (c) of samples.
Figure 2. Dimensions of L-shaped (a), T-shaped (b), and planning holes (c) of samples.
Applsci 14 10044 g002
Applsci 14 10044 g003
Figure 3. Setups for measuring WLR of socket in panels: (a) L-shaped, and (b) T-shaped.
Figure 3. Setups for measuring WLR of socket in panels: (a) L-shaped, and (b) T-shaped.
Applsci 14 10044 g003
Applsci 14 10044 g004
Figure 4. Typical load–deflection curves of corner joints.
Figure 4. Typical load–deflection curves of corner joints.
Applsci 14 10044 g004
Applsci 14 10044 g005
Figure 5. Failure modes of all evaluated joints constructed by various materials.
Figure 5. Failure modes of all evaluated joints constructed by various materials.
Applsci 14 10044 g005
Applsci 14 10044 g006
Figure 6. Bending moment capacities of joints constructed using various joint shapes and materials of face and edge members.
Figure 6. Bending moment capacities of joints constructed using various joint shapes and materials of face and edge members.
Applsci 14 10044 g006
Applsci 14 10044 g007
Figure 7. Typical load–deflection curves and failure modes of L-shaped joints constructed by various joint types.
Figure 7. Typical load–deflection curves and failure modes of L-shaped joints constructed by various joint types.
Applsci 14 10044 g007
Applsci 14 10044 g008
Figure 8. Bending moment capacity of L-shaped corner joint constructed by different joint types and material types.
Figure 8. Bending moment capacity of L-shaped corner joint constructed by different joint types and material types.
Applsci 14 10044 g008
Table 1. Density and moisture content of three evaluated wood-based panels.
Table 1. Density and moisture content of three evaluated wood-based panels.
Material TypeDensity (g/cm3)Moisture Content (%)
PB0.66(1.7)8.83(1.2)
PL0.70(1.7)9.48(2.3)
BB0.47(7.4)9.69(0.9)
Note: The values in parenthesis are COV in percentage.
Table 2. ANOVA of effects of joint shape and materials of face and edge members on BMC of joints.
Table 2. ANOVA of effects of joint shape and materials of face and edge members on BMC of joints.
SourcesFp-Value
Joint shape69.4<0.001 *
Face member81.6<0.001 *
Edge member0.060.938
Joint shape × face member7.830.001 *
Joint shape × edge member0.0670.953
Face member × edge member0.0230.999
Joint shape × face member × edge member0.4340.784
* means the factor has significant effects at the 5% significance level.
Table 3. Mean comparisons of bending moment capacity for joint shape with each combination of face member and edge member materials.
Table 3. Mean comparisons of bending moment capacity for joint shape with each combination of face member and edge member materials.
Face MemberEdge MemberJoint Shape
L-ShapeT-Shape
PBPB4.4 ± 0.7 (14.9)Bc10.0 ± 0.8 (7.9)Ab
PL4.9 ± 0.6 (13.2)Bc9.4 ± 1.1 (11.7)Ab
BB4.6 ± 0.3 (7.0)Bc10.0 ± 1.1 (11.0)Ab
PLPB11.2 ± 0.9 (8.0)Aa11.9 ± 1.5 (12.3)Aa
PL11.4 ± 0.7 (7.6)Aa11.8 ± 1.7 (14.7)Aa
BB10.8 ± 0.8 (6.4)Aa12.3 ± 0.9 (7.2)Aa
BBPB8.1 ± 1.1 (13.3)Bb10.8 ± 1.2 (11.2)Aa
PL7.6 ± 1.3 (16.6)Bb11.6 ± 1.2 (9.9)Aa
BB7.6 ± 0.7 (8.6)Bb11.0 ± 1.2 (11.0)Aa
Note: The mean values in the same row not followed by a common upper-case letter are significantly different from one another at the 5% significance level. The mean values in the same column not followed by a common lower-case letter are significantly different from one another at the 5% significance level. The values in the parenthesis are coefficients of variance (COV).
Table 4. ANOVA results of bending moment capacity of L-shaped corner joint.
Table 4. ANOVA results of bending moment capacity of L-shaped corner joint.
SourcesFp-Value
Material type131<0.001 *
Joint type128<0.001 *
Material type × Joint type32<0.001 *
* means that significance level is less than 0.05.
Table 5. Comparison of bending moment capacities of L-shaped corner joints for each combination of material type and joint type.
Table 5. Comparison of bending moment capacities of L-shaped corner joints for each combination of material type and joint type.
Joint TypeMaterial Type
PBPLBB
TE6.1 ± 0.7 (11.2)Ca15.5 ± 1.4 (9.3)Aa13.2 ± 2.2 (16.7)Ba
TD5.9 ± 0.6 (10.0)Aa6.4 ± 1.1 (17.6)Ac6.2 ± 1.1 (17.7)Ac
ED4.4 ± 0.7 (14.9)Cb11.4 ± 0.7 (6.4)Ab7.6 ± 0.7 (8.6)Bb
1/2(TE + TD)6.0210.969.68
Ratio0.731.040.79
Note: The mean values in the same row not followed by a common upper-case letter are significantly different from one another at the 5% significance level. The mean values in the same column not followed by a common lower-case letter are significantly different from one another at the 5% significance level. The values in the parenthesis are coefficients of variance (COV).
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Hu, W.; Zhao, Y.; Xu, W.; Liu, Y. The Influences of Selected Factors on Bending Moment Capacity of Case Furniture Joints. Appl. Sci. 2024, 14, 10044. https://doi.org/10.3390/app142110044

AMA Style

Hu W, Zhao Y, Xu W, Liu Y. The Influences of Selected Factors on Bending Moment Capacity of Case Furniture Joints. Applied Sciences. 2024; 14(21):10044. https://doi.org/10.3390/app142110044

Chicago/Turabian Style

Hu, Wengang, Yuan Zhao, Wei Xu, and Yuanqiang Liu. 2024. "The Influences of Selected Factors on Bending Moment Capacity of Case Furniture Joints" Applied Sciences 14, no. 21: 10044. https://doi.org/10.3390/app142110044

APA Style

Hu, W., Zhao, Y., Xu, W., & Liu, Y. (2024). The Influences of Selected Factors on Bending Moment Capacity of Case Furniture Joints. Applied Sciences, 14(21), 10044. https://doi.org/10.3390/app142110044

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