Next Article in Journal
Epoxy Resins and Their Hardeners Based on Phosphorus–Nitrogen Compounds
Next Article in Special Issue
Immunomodulatory Potential and Biocompatibility of Chitosan–Hydroxyapatite Biocomposites for Tissue Engineering
Previous Article in Journal
Utilization of Coal Ash for Production of Refractory Bricks
Previous Article in Special Issue
Innovation in Biodegradable Composites: Wheat Flour and Hermetia illucens Larvae Flour Biocomposites Enhanced with Cellulose Nanocrystals
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Investigation of Particleboard Production from Durian Husk and Bamboo Waste

by
Thi Kim Hong Tang
1,* and
Nhat Quang Nguyen
2
1
Faculty of Forestry, Nong Lam University-Ho Chi Minh City, Ho Chi Minh City 700000, Vietnam
2
Global Alliance for Inclusion and Nature Positive (GAIN+), Ho Chi Minh City 700000, Vietnam
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
J. Compos. Sci. 2025, 9(6), 276; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcs9060276
Submission received: 6 May 2025 / Revised: 23 May 2025 / Accepted: 24 May 2025 / Published: 29 May 2025
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Sustainable Biocomposites, 3rd Edition)

Abstract

:
Agricultural residues offer promising opportunities for the development of biocomposites. Durian husk, a lignocellulosic by-product abundantly available in Southeast Asia, and bamboo waste, an underutilized biomass resource, present considerable potential for sustainable particleboard production. This study focuses on developing single-layer bio-based particleboards using varying proportions of durian husk and bamboo waste bonded with urea formaldehyde resin. The fabricated boards were evaluated for thickness swelling, modulus of rupture, and internal bond strength according to relevant European standards. Results indicated that all particleboards met the Type P1 requirements for general-purpose use under dry conditions, as specified in BS EN 312:2010. The findings demonstrate the feasibility of converting agricultural waste into value-added, eco-friendly materials, supporting waste valorization, promoting circular economy practices, and contributing to the development of bio-based materials.

1. Introduction

The development of particleboards using agricultural residues has become a key strategy in advancing sustainable materials, providing a means to reduce reliance on virgin wood while valorizing biomass waste [1]. In response to the growing demand for environmentally responsible alternatives, numerous studies have been conducted, and ongoing research continues to focus on the utilization of lignocellulosic crop by-products as sustainable raw materials for composite manufacturing [2,3,4,5]. Concurrently, heightened attention to environmentally friendly bonding methods has stimulated significant efforts toward the development of binderless boards and bio-based adhesives [6,7].
Bamboo is widely recognized for its rapid growth and high annual regrowth following harvesting, making it a highly renewable and sustainable resource [8,9,10]. Its versatility enables its application across various sectors, including construction, furniture manufacturing, handicrafts, engineered bamboo products, and bamboo-based boards [11]. Processing bamboo into strips results in an average material recovery rate of approximately 34.4% [12], leaving a considerable proportion of bamboo residues. This residual biomass offers potential for sustainable resource utilization through value-added processes such as particleboard manufacturing. Utilizing biomass by-products from the bamboo processing industry further supports environmental sustainability [13].
Durian, regarded as a highly valuable crop and one of the most extensively produced fruits in Southeast Asia, has seen remarkable growth in its global export market over the past twenty years [14]. In 2023, durian production reached approximately 1.85 million tonnes in Indonesia [15], 1.19 million tonnes in Vietnam [16], and significant volumes in Thailand, Malaysia, and the Philippines [17,18,19]. Vietnam, in particular, has emerged as a dominant exporter, with approximately 600,000 tonnes of durians exported in 2023 and total production reaching 1.5 million tonnes in 2024 [20,21]. The global durian market is projected to expand at a compound annual growth rate of 4.04% through 2035, further amplifying the need for effective utilization of durian by-products [22]. Given that the husk accounts for approximately 60% of the fruit’s mass [23], durian processing in key durian-producing countries generated an estimated 2.7 million tonnes of durian husk in just 2023. As a result, durian husk has become an abundant agricultural by-product that contributes significantly to waste generation when improperly managed through landfilling or open burning, as its substantial volume and bulk increasingly strain landfill capacity and contribute to serious environmental pollution [24,25,26,27]. In response to these challenges, there is an urgent need to explore innovative strategies for recycling durian husk as a means to reduce environmental impacts, alleviate pressure on landfill capacity, and support the utilization of agricultural residues.
Given the substantial generation of bamboo waste and durian husk, several studies have demonstrated their feasibility as raw materials for composite manufacturing, including particleboards produced from cocoa pod husk and bamboo waste [28,29], bamboo waste with maltodextrin-based adhesive [30], durian husk [31], and durian husk combined with rubberwood [32], as well as insulator boards fabricated from durian husk fibers [33]. However, despite the growing interest in utilizing agricultural residues for composite applications, research specifically investigating the combined use of durian husk and bamboo waste remains limited. This study addresses this gap by examining the fabrication of particleboards from these two residues and evaluating their physical and mechanical properties, thereby contributing to the advancement of sustainable lignocellulosic composites.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Materials

Durian husks were obtained from fruit processing centers in the Mekong Delta, Vietnam, while bamboo waste was collected from a bamboo furniture factory in Binh Duong Province, Vietnam. Both raw materials were processed into chips of relatively uniform sizes within their designated size classifications. The chipping process comprised two sequential steps. First, the materials were coarsely chipped; the resulting chips were then further processed through a chipper equipped with a fine perforated screen to yield finer particles. Following chipping, the durian husk and bamboo chips were dried in a Memmert UN260 (Memmert GmbH, Büchenbach, Germany) oven at 105 °C until their moisture content reached approximately 4–6%. The dried chips were subsequently screened to remove fine dust and classified into two particle size fractions using mesh screens: 0.5–2 mm and 2–4 mm. For each experimental formulation of the bio-based particleboard, the classified particles were proportionally blended according to the designated mixing ratios.
The adhesive used for particleboard production was urea formaldehyde (UF) resin, supplied by an industrial adhesive manufacturer (Better Resin Co., Ltd., Di An City, Binh Duong Province, Vietnam). The UF resin exhibited a solids content of 60%, a viscosity of 0.5 Pa·s at 20 °C, a pH value ranging from 7.5 to 8.5, and a gel time of 40–60 s at 100 °C, with a 40% solids ammonium nitrate solution employed as the hardener.

2.2. Response Surface Methodology and Central Composite Design

This study employed the central composite design (CCD) within the framework of response surface methodology (RSM) to evaluate the effects of durian husk ratio (DHR) and UF resin ratio (UFR) on the thickness swelling (TS), modulus of rupture (MOR), and internal bond strength (IB) of bio-based particleboards. A nine-run experimental design, incorporating cube, center, and axial points, was conducted using Minitab version 21.2. The factor ranges are outlined in Table 1, with DHR varying from 4% to 46% and UFR ranging from 7% to 16%.

2.3. Particleboard Manufacturing

Single-layer particleboards were manufactured with a density of 0.65 g/cm3 using a mixture of bamboo and durian husk particles bonded with UF resin. The ratios of durian husk particles and UF resin were varied according to CCD, as shown in Table 1. Mats measuring 360 × 360 mm were initially formed, cold-prepressed, and subsequently hot-pressed at 140 °C under a pressure of 2.5 MPa for 10 min. Each experimental condition was replicated three times, resulting in a total of 27 particleboards. Following the pressing process, the boards were left to equilibrate at room temperature for 24 h. Prior to testing, all boards were trimmed to remove edge irregularities and sanded on both faces using a wide belt sander to ensure uniform surface quality.

2.4. Chemical Analysis of Durian Husks

The lignocellulosic composition of durian husk was quantified using standardized procedures established by the Technical Association of the Pulp and Paper Industry (TAPPI), which require the prior removal of extractives to ensure accurate determination. To this end, extractive-free samples were prepared through a multi-step solvent extraction process using an ethanol–benzene mixture (1:2, v/v), followed by 95% ethanol and hot distilled water, in accordance with TAPPI T 264 cm-22 [34]. Holocellulose and lignin contents were subsequently determined from these extractive-free samples. Holocellulose, comprising cellulose and hemicelluloses, was determined using the acid chlorite method [35], while lignin content was measured following TAPPI T 222 om-21 [36], which specifies the determination of acid-insoluble lignin in wood and pulp. All analyses were performed on three replicate samples for each component.

2.5. Testing of Bio-Based Particleboards

Physical and mechanical properties of the investigated bio-based particleboards, including TS, MOR, and IB, were evaluated in accordance with BS EN 317:1993 [37], BS EN 310:1993 [38], and BS EN 319:1993 [39], respectively. For each experimental condition, three replicate boards were tested. From each board, five specimens measuring 50 × 50 mm were prepared for TS, another five of the same dimensions for IB, and five specimens measuring 290 × 50 mm for MOR. All specimens were conditioned to a constant mass in a Memmert HPP260eco (Memmert GmbH, Büchenbach, Germany) climate chamber maintained at 65% relative humidity and 20 °C. Constant mass was defined as the point at which the difference between two successive weight measurements, taken 24 h apart, did not exceed 0.1% of the specimen’s mass. For each board, the average value of the five specimens was first calculated, and the final result for each test under a given condition was obtained by averaging the three board-level means. The results were then evaluated against the specifications outlined for Type P1 particleboards intended for dry environments, as defined in BS EN 312:2010 [40], which require MOR ≥ 10.5 N/mm2 and IB ≥ 0.28 N/mm2 (1 N/mm2 = 1 MPa).
The resulting data were subsequently subjected to statistical analysis using Minitab 21.2 (Minitab LLC, State College, PA, USA). The significance of individual factors and their interactions was evaluated using standardized effect estimates, visualized in a Pareto chart, with a 95% confidence level (p-value < 0.05). Model performance was assessed using the coefficient of determination (R2), along with the adjusted R2 value. The Ryan–Joiner normality test was used to verify the normal distribution of residuals for all response variables. Final predictive models were developed for TS, MOR, and IB. All graphs and three-dimensional response surface plots were generated using OriginPro 2024 (OriginLab Corporation, Northampton, MA, USA).

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Chemical Analysis Result of Durian Husks

The lignocellulosic composition of durian husk is presented in Table 2. The results obtained in this study exhibit minor variations from the findings of Khedari et al. [41] and Jha et al. [42]. Durian husk demonstrates a holocellulose content comparable to that of bamboo but with moderately lower lignin levels. Consequently, the composition of durian husk is considered suitable for application in particleboard production.

3.2. Physical and Mechanical Properties of Investigated Bio-Based Particleboard

The test results on TS, MOR, and IB of the bio-based particleboards are presented in Figure 1 and Figure 2. The highest TS was observed at a formulation containing 25% DHR and 7% UFR, whereas the lowest TS was recorded at 25% DHR and 16% UFR. In terms of bending strength, the maximum MOR was achieved at 40% DHR and 15% UFR, while the minimum value was obtained at 10% DHR and 8% UFR. For IB, the highest strength was yielded at 25% DHR and 16% UFR, whereas the lowest was found at 25% DHR and 7% UFR. All recorded MOR and IB values conformed to the performance standards specified in BS EN 312:2010 [40] for Type P1 particleboards intended for applications in dry-service environments.

3.3. Effects of DHR and UFR on TS, MOR, and IB of Bio-Based Particleboard

3.3.1. Effect of DHR and UFR on TS of Bio-Based Particleboard

The ratios of durian husk and UF resin significantly affected the TS of the bio-based particleboards, as both factors exceeded the 95% confidence level in the Pareto chart (Figure 3). Among these factors, UFR exhibited a more dominant influence. Increasing UFR and decreasing DHR led to lower TS values. This trend may be attributed to the higher adhesive content provided by increased UF resin levels, as well as the greater lignin content present in particleboards with lower DHR, given that durian husk contains less lignin than bamboo (Table 2). Both lignin and UF resin are known to contribute to improved water resistance and dimensional stability [3,45,46,47]. These findings are consistent with previous studies on bio-based particleboards manufactured from lignocellulosic residues [5,7,32,48,49,50].

3.3.2. Effects of DHR and UFR on MOR and IB of Bio-Based Particleboard

The proportions of durian husk and UF resin significantly influenced the MOR and IB of the bio-based particleboards, as both factors surpassed the 95% confidence threshold in the Pareto chart (Figure 4). Among these, UFR had the most pronounced effect. Higher MOR values were associated with increasing levels of both UF resin and durian husk, whereas IB improved with increasing UFR and reducing DHR (Figure 5). These trends align with previous findings indicating that both UF resin and lignin enhance inter-fiber bonding and structural rigidity, thereby contributing to improved mechanical performance in particleboards with higher resin and lignin contents [45,46,47,49,51,52]. Additionally, the elevated cellulose content resulting from a higher durian husk ratio may further enhance mechanical properties, as cellulose is a key structural component in lignocellulosic composites [7,48]. These findings are in line with earlier studies on particleboards manufactured from various lignocellulosic residues [3,4,32,47,50,53].

3.4. Regression Analysis and Model Adequacy

Model adequacy was evaluated using R², a statistical measure that quantifies the goodness of fit between the predicted and observed values. The R² values for TS, MOR, and IB were found to be 98.52%, 97.52%, and 98.72%, respectively, demonstrating a strong correlation with the experimental data. These results indicate that the model provides a reliable representation of the variability within the dataset, leaving less than 2% residual variability for these factors.
To further assess the reliability of the model, the adjusted R² values were computed, yielding 96.05% for TS, 93.38% for MOR, and 96.58% for IB. These values reaffirm the model’s robustness and its applicability in practical field conditions, suggesting a high level of predictive accuracy.
Following model fitting, the Ryan–Joiner normality test was employed to evaluate the normality of residuals, particularly suitable for small sample sizes (<50). Based on the test criteria, residuals are considered normally distributed when the p-value exceeds 0.05, while values below this threshold imply a statistically significant departure from normality. In this study, the Ryan–Joiner test produced non-significant results (p-value > 0.1), confirming that the residuals closely followed a normal distribution. This conclusion was further supported by the normal probability plot, where data points aligned closely with the reference line, validating the reliability of the model’s predictions (Figure 6).
The final predictive mathematical models were developed based on significant actual factors influencing the properties of bio-based particleboards made from durian husk and bamboo waste. These models describe the relationships between key parameters and material performance indicators, specifically TS (%), MOR (MPa), and IB (MPa), under varying process conditions, as presented in Equations (1)–(3).
TS = 26.465 + 0.03569 DHR 0.5296 UFR
MOR = 7.47 + 0.1706 DHR + 0.567 UFR 0.00952 DHR × UFR
IB = 0.24497 0.000606 DHR + 0.011899 UFR

4. Conclusions

This study successfully developed single-layer bio-based particleboards from agricultural residues, specifically durian husk and bamboo waste. All produced boards met the Type P1 standard specified in BS EN 312:2010, indicating their suitability for general-purpose use in dry conditions. The findings clearly demonstrated that raw material composition significantly influenced key performance parameters, including thickness swelling, modulus of rupture, and internal bond strength. These results underscore the potential of underutilized biomass resources in creating sustainable, value-added composite materials, thereby contributing to waste valorization and advancing circular economy practices in material and construction industries.
Among the nine formulations tested, the board composed of 25% durian husk and 16% urea formaldehyde resin showed the most favorable overall performance, achieving superior dimensional stability and internal bonding while maintaining acceptable bending strength. However, the high resin content may pose challenges in terms of cost-effectiveness and environmental sustainability. In comparison, the formulation with 25% durian husk and 11.5% urea formaldehyde resin offered a more resource-efficient alternative, delivering satisfactory mechanical properties with reduced adhesive input. This composition is therefore recommended for further investigation, particularly in relation to pilot-scale production and industrial-scale implementation.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, T.K.H.T.; data curation, T.K.H.T. and N.Q.N.; formal analysis, T.K.H.T.; investigation, T.K.H.T. and N.Q.N.; methodology, T.K.H.T.; project administration, T.K.H.T.; resources, T.K.H.T. and N.Q.N.; software, N.Q.N.; supervision, T.K.H.T.; validation, T.K.H.T.; visualization, N.Q.N.; writing—original draft preparation, T.K.H.T. and N.Q.N.; writing—review and editing, T.K.H.T. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research and the APC were funded by the Global Alliance for Inclusion and Nature Positive (GAIN+), grant number GAINPLUS-BIOMATERIAL1224.

Data Availability Statement

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

Conflicts of Interest

Author Nhat Quang Nguyen was employed by the Global Alliance for Inclusion and Nature Positive (GAIN+). The remaining author declares that this research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Abbreviations

The following abbreviations are used in this manuscript:
CCDCentral composite design
DHRDurian husk ratio
IBInternal bond strength
MORModulus of rupture
Coefficient of determination
RSMResponse surface methodology
TAPPITechnical Association of the Pulp and Paper Industry
TSThickness swelling
UFUrea formaldehyde
UFRUrea formaldehyde resin ratio

References

  1. Okeke, F.O.; Ahmed, A.; Imam, A.; Hassanin, H. Study on Agricultural Waste Utilization in Sustainable Particleboard Production. E3S Web Conf. 2024, 563, 02007. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Mirindi, D. A Review of Particleboard Development and Performance Using Non-Toxic and Biodegradable Adhesives. Int. J. Eng. Trends Technol. 2024, 72, 252–260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Lee, S.H.; Lum, W.C.; Boon, J.G.; Kristak, L.; Antov, P.; Pędzik, M.; Rogoziński, T.; Taghiyari, H.R.; Lubis, M.A.R.; Fatriasari, W.; et al. Particleboard from Agricultural Biomass and Recycled Wood Waste: A Review. J. Mater. Res. Technol. 2022, 20, 4630–4658. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Tarigan, F.O.; Hakim, L.; Purwoko, A.; Sucipto, T.; Nasution, H.; Fatriasari, W.; Lubis, M.A.R.; Sutiawan, J.; Bakhsi, M.I.; Kim, N.-H.; et al. Development and Characterization of Novel Hybrid Particleboard Made from Several Non-Wood Lignocellulosic Materials. Polymers 2025, 17, 512. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Chandroji Rao, K.M.; Sheshagiri, M.B.; Ramamoorthy, R.V.; Amran, M.; Nandanwar, A.; Vijayakumar, P.; Avudaiappan, S.; Guindos, P. Effect of Density on Acoustic and Thermal Properties of Low-Density Particle Boards Made from Agro-Residues: Towards Sustainable Material Solutions. BioResources 2024, 20, 601–624. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Calvez, I.; Garcia, R.; Koubaa, A.; Landry, V.; Cloutier, A. Recent Advances in Bio-Based Adhesives and Formaldehyde-Free Technologies for Wood-Based Panel Manufacturing. Curr. For. Rep. 2024, 10, 386–400. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Saropas, N.; Huijisut, P.; Noratad, S.; Supansomboon, S.; Wanakamol, P.; Supansomboon, S. Mechanical and Physical Properties of Binderless Particleboard from Rice Straw and Banana Pseudostem. Curr. Appl. Sci. Technol. 2024, 25, e0262175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Kelkar, B.U.; Shukla, S.R.; Nagraik, P.; Paul, B.N. Structural Bamboo Composites: A Review of Processing, Factors Affecting Properties and Recent Advances. Adv. Bamboo Sci. 2023, 3, 100026. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Yen, T.-M.; Lee, J.-S. Comparing Aboveground Carbon Sequestration between Moso Bamboo (Phyllostachys heterocycla) and China Fir (Cunninghamia lanceolata) Forests Based on the Allometric Model. For. Ecol. Manag. 2011, 261, 995–1002. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Kuehl, Y. Resources, Yield, and Volume of Bamboos. In Bamboo; Liese, W., Köhl, M., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2015; pp. 91–111. ISBN 978-3-319-14132-9. [Google Scholar]
  11. Liese, W.; Welling, J.; Tang, T.K.H. Utilization of Bamboo. In Bamboo; Liese, W., Köhl, M., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2015; pp. 299–346. ISBN 978-3-319-14132-9. [Google Scholar]
  12. Laemlaksakul, V.; Kaewkuekool, S. Laminated Bamboo Materials for Furniture—A Systematic Approach to Innovative Product Design. WSEAS Trans. Adv. Eng. Educ. 2006, 3, 424–430. [Google Scholar]
  13. Widyorini, R. Evaluation of Physical and Mechanical Properties of Particleboard Made from Petung Bamboo Using Sucrose-Based Adhesive. BioResources 2020, 15, 5072–5086. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Durian Global Trade Overview 2023; FAO: Rome, Italy, 2023; p. 10.
  15. BPS—Statistics Indonesia Production of Fruits, 2021–2023. Available online: https://www.bps.go.id/en/statistics-table/2/NjIjMg==/production-of-fruits.html (accessed on 15 December 2024).
  16. Vietnam National Statistics Office’s Website Press Release Socio-Economic Situation in the Fourth Quarter and 2023. Available online: https://www.gso.gov.vn/en/data-and-statistics/2024/02/socio-economic-situation-in-the-fourth-quarter-and-2023/ (accessed on 15 December 2024).
  17. Walderich, A. Production Volume of Durians in Thailand in 2023, by Region. Available online: https://www.statista.com/statistics/1319755/thailand-durian-production-by-region/ (accessed on 15 December 2024).
  18. Siddharta, A. Production Volume of Durians in Malaysia from 2014 to 2023. Available online: https://www.statista.com/statistics/1000876/malaysia-durian-production/ (accessed on 15 December 2024).
  19. Balita, C. Production Volume of Durian in the Philippines from 2012 to 2023. Available online: https://www.statista.com/statistics/1289632/production-of-durian-philippines/ (accessed on 15 December 2024).
  20. Vietnam Durian Export Research Report 2024–2033; China Research and Intelligence: Shanghai, China, 2024; p. 80.
  21. Vietnam National Statistics Office’s Website Press Release Socio-Economic Situation in the Fourth Quarter and 2024. Available online: https://www.gso.gov.vn/en/highlight/2025/02/socio-economic-situation-in-the-fourth-quarter-and-2024/ (accessed on 15 January 2025).
  22. Gorade, H. Fresh Durian Market Demand, Size, Share, Trends, Forecast—2035; Market Research Future: Pune, India, 2025; p. 100. [Google Scholar]
  23. Khaksar, G.; Kasemcholathan, S.; Sirikantaramas, S. Durian (Durio zibethinus L.): Nutritional Composition, Pharmacological Implications, Value-Added Products, and Omics-Based Investigations. Horticulturae 2024, 10, 342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Payus, C.M.; Refdin, M.A.; Zahari, N.Z.; Rimba, A.B.; Geetha, M.; Saroj, C.; Gasparatos, A.; Fukushi, K.; Alvin Oliver, P. Durian Husk Wastes as Low-Cost Adsorbent for Physical Pollutants Removal: Groundwater Supply. Mater. Today Proc. 2021, 42, 80–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Tan, C.-H.; Ishak, W.R.W.; Easa, A.M.; Hii, C.-L.; Chuo, K.M.J.; How, Y.-H.; Pui, L.-P. From Waste to Wealth: A Review on Valorisation of Durian Waste as Functional Food Ingredient. J. Food Meas. Charact. 2023, 17, 6222–6235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Wai, W.W.; Alkarkhi, A.F.M.; Easa, A.M. Effect of Extraction Conditions on Yield and Degree of Esterification of Durian Rind Pectin: An Experimental Design. Food Bioprod. Process. 2010, 88, 209–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Gamay, R.A.J.; Botecario, P.M.N.; Sanchez, P.D.C.; Alvarado, M.C. Durian (Durio zibenthinus) Waste: A Promising Resource for Food and Diverse Applications—A Comprehensive Review. Food Prod. Process. Nutr. 2024, 6, 27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Tang, T.K.H.; Nguyen, D.L. Investigation on Producing Single-Layer Particleboard from Bamboo Waste and Cocoa Pod Husks. J. For. Sci. Technol. 2020, 136–141. [Google Scholar]
  29. Tang, T.K.H.; Nguyen, D.L.; Ho, T.T.D. Optimum Condition of Manufacturing Hybrid Particleboard from Mixture of Cocoa Pod Husk and Bamboo Particles. J. Agric. Dev. 2019, 18, 10–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Widyorini, R.; Aini, E.N.; Lubis, Y.S.; Dewi, G.K. Water Resistance Ability and Mechanical Strength of Eco-Friendly Particleboard Made from Bamboo Waste and Maltodextrin-Based Adhesive. Drv. Ind. 2025, 76, 3–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Zddin, Z.; Risby, M.S. Durian Husk as Potential Source for Particleboard Industry. AIP Conf. Proc. 2010, 1217, 546–553. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Tang, T.K.H.; Nguyen, N.Q. Mechanical and physical properties of particleboards made from durian husk and rubberwood. J. For. Sci. Technol. 2025, 14, 160–167. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Humaira Alias, A.; Zainudin, E.S.; Mohd Norizan, M.N.; Rushdan, A.I. Development and Characterisation of Biocomposite Insulator Board from Durian Skin Fibres. Pertanika J. Sci. Technol. 2023, 31, 59–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. TAPPI T 264 Cm-22; Preparation of Wood for Chemical Analysis. Technical Association of the Pulp and Paper Industry: Norcross, GA, USA, 2022.
  35. Browning, B.L. Methods of Wood Chemistry; Wiley-Interscience: New York, NY, USA, 1967; Volume 2. [Google Scholar]
  36. TAPPI T 222 Om-21; Acid-Insoluble Lignin in Wood and Pulp. Technical Association of the Pulp and Paper Industry: Norcross, GA, USA, 2021.
  37. BS EN 317:1993; Particleboards and Fibreboards—Determination of Swelling in Thickness After Immersion in Water. British Standards Institution: London, UK, 1993.
  38. BS EN 310:1993; Wood-Based Panels—Determination of Modulus of Elasticity in Bending and of Bending Strength. British Standards Institution: London, UK, 1993.
  39. BS EN 319:1993; Particleboards and Fibreboards—Determination of Tensile Strength Perpendicular to the Plane of the Board. British Standards Institution: London, UK, 1993.
  40. BS EN 312:2010; Particleboards—Specifications. British Standards Institution: London, UK, 2010.
  41. Khedari, J.; Nankongnab, N.; Hirunlabh, J.; Teekasap, S. New Low-Cost Insulation Particleboards from Mixture of Durian Peel and Coconut Coir. Build. Environ. 2004, 39, 59–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Jha, K.; Yahya, E.B.; Bairwan, R.D.; Sabri, M.; Abdul Khalil, H.P.S.; Ahmad, M.I.; Surya, I. Eco-Friendly Approach for Carboxymethyl Cellulose Isolation from Durian Peel Waste and Aerogel Scaffold Preparation. Nano-Struct. Nano-Objects 2024, 40, 101345. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Liese, W.; Tang, T.K.H. Properties of the Bamboo Culm. In Bamboo; Liese, W., Köhl, M., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2015; pp. 227–256. ISBN 978-3-319-14132-9. [Google Scholar]
  44. Chaowana, P.; Barbu, M.C. Bamboo: Potential Material for Biocomposites. In Lignocellulosic Fibre and Biomass-Based Composite Materials; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2017; pp. 259–289. ISBN 978-0-08-100959-8. [Google Scholar]
  45. Mai, C.; Zhang, K. Wood Chemistry. In Springer Handbook of Wood Science and Technology; Niemz, P., Teischinger, A., Sandberg, D., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2023; pp. 179–279. ISBN 978-3-030-81314-7. [Google Scholar]
  46. Niemz, P.; Mai, C.; Schmitt, U. Introduction to Wood Science. In Springer Handbook of Wood Science and Technology; Niemz, P., Teischinger, A., Sandberg, D., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2023; pp. 25–40. ISBN 978-3-030-81314-7. [Google Scholar]
  47. Klímek, P.; Meinlschmidt, P.; Wimmer, R.; Plinke, B.; Schirp, A. Using Sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.), Topinambour (Helianthus tuberosus L.) and Cup-Plant (Silphium perfoliatum L.) Stalks as Alternative Raw Materials for Particleboards. Ind. Crops Prod. 2016, 92, 157–164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Bardak, S.; Nemli, G.; Tiryaki, S. The Influence of Raw Material Growth Region, Anatomical Structure and Chemical Composition of Wood on the Quality Properties of Particleboards. Maderas Cienc. Tecnol. 2017, 19, 363–372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Boon, J.G.; Hashim, R.; Sulaiman, O.; Sugimoto, T.; Sato, M.; Salim, N.; Amini, M.H.M.; Nor Izaida, I.; Sitti Fatimah, M.R. Importance of Lignin on the Properties of Binderless Particleboard Made from Oil Palm Trunk. J. Eng. Appl. Sci. 2017, 12, 33–40. [Google Scholar]
  50. Liang, J.; Wu, J.; Xu, J. Low-Formaldehyde Emission Composite Particleboard Manufactured from Waste Chestnut Bur. J. Wood Sci. 2021, 67, 21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Vitrone, F.; Ramos, D.; Ferrando, F.; Salvadó, J. Binderless Fiberboards for Sustainable Construction. Materials, Production Methods and Applications. J. Build. Eng. 2021, 44, 102625. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Hubbe, M.A.; Pizzi, A.; Zhang, H.; Halis, R. Critical Links Governing Performance of Self-Binding and Natural Binders for Hot-Pressed Reconstituted Lignocellulosic Board without Added Formaldehyde: A Review. BioResources 2017, 13, 2049–2115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Iswanto, A.H.; Aritonang, W.; Azhar, I.; Supriyanto; Fatriasari, W. The Physical, Mechanical and Durability Properties of Sorghum Bagasse Particleboard by Layering Surface Treatment. J. Indian Acad. Wood Sci. 2017, 14, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. TS of bio-based particleboards manufactured with different DHR and UFR.
Figure 1. TS of bio-based particleboards manufactured with different DHR and UFR.
Jcs 09 00276 g001
Figure 2. MOR and IB of bio-based particleboard manufactured with different DHR and UFR.
Figure 2. MOR and IB of bio-based particleboard manufactured with different DHR and UFR.
Jcs 09 00276 g002
Figure 3. Pareto chart illustrating the standardized effects of DHR and UFR on TS (a), and response surface plots depicting the relationship between TS, DHR, and UFR (b). The color gradient represents predicted response values, where warmer colors (e.g., red, yellow) indicate higher values and cooler colors (e.g., blue, green) indicate lower values.
Figure 3. Pareto chart illustrating the standardized effects of DHR and UFR on TS (a), and response surface plots depicting the relationship between TS, DHR, and UFR (b). The color gradient represents predicted response values, where warmer colors (e.g., red, yellow) indicate higher values and cooler colors (e.g., blue, green) indicate lower values.
Jcs 09 00276 g003
Figure 4. Pareto chart illustrating the standardized effects of DHR and UFR on MOR (a) and IB (b).
Figure 4. Pareto chart illustrating the standardized effects of DHR and UFR on MOR (a) and IB (b).
Jcs 09 00276 g004
Figure 5. Response surface plots depicting the relationship between MOR, DHR, and UFR (a) and the relationship between IB, DHR, and UFR (b). The color gradient represents predicted response values, where warmer colors (e.g., red, yellow) indicate higher values and cooler colors (e.g., blue, green) indicate lower values.
Figure 5. Response surface plots depicting the relationship between MOR, DHR, and UFR (a) and the relationship between IB, DHR, and UFR (b). The color gradient represents predicted response values, where warmer colors (e.g., red, yellow) indicate higher values and cooler colors (e.g., blue, green) indicate lower values.
Jcs 09 00276 g005
Figure 6. Ryan–Joiner normality test results for TS (a), MOR (b), and IB (c).
Figure 6. Ryan–Joiner normality test results for TS (a), MOR (b), and IB (c).
Jcs 09 00276 g006
Table 1. Factors and their values as applied in central composite design.
Table 1. Factors and their values as applied in central composite design.
FactorsRanges of Actual and Coded Values
−α−10+1
Durian husk ratio (DHR, %)410254046
UF resin ratio (UFR, %)7811.51516
The coded values are defined as follows: −α indicates the lower axial point, −1 the lower cube point, 0 the center point, +1 the upper cube point, and +α the upper axial point.
Table 2. Lignocellulosic composition of durian husk compared with bamboo (%, w/w, oven dried).
Table 2. Lignocellulosic composition of durian husk compared with bamboo (%, w/w, oven dried).
ComponentDurian Husk
in This Study
Durian Husk [41,42]Bamboo [43,44]
Holocellulose72.84 (0.89)65.3–73.5462.5–79.9
Lignin15.92 (0.56)15.45–18.720.5–32.2
Values in parentheses represent the standard deviations based on three replicates.
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

Tang, T.K.H.; Nguyen, N.Q. Investigation of Particleboard Production from Durian Husk and Bamboo Waste. J. Compos. Sci. 2025, 9, 276. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcs9060276

AMA Style

Tang TKH, Nguyen NQ. Investigation of Particleboard Production from Durian Husk and Bamboo Waste. Journal of Composites Science. 2025; 9(6):276. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcs9060276

Chicago/Turabian Style

Tang, Thi Kim Hong, and Nhat Quang Nguyen. 2025. "Investigation of Particleboard Production from Durian Husk and Bamboo Waste" Journal of Composites Science 9, no. 6: 276. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcs9060276

APA Style

Tang, T. K. H., & Nguyen, N. Q. (2025). Investigation of Particleboard Production from Durian Husk and Bamboo Waste. Journal of Composites Science, 9(6), 276. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcs9060276

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop