Use of special 3-D structures in sandwich constructions, such as corrugated board or other lightweight panels, is well-known. However until now, no technology could produce such engineered structures in a full core material in a one-press process. Now Dascanova Technology says it can offer new possibilities in the production of materials such as fibreboard or particleboard.

Norbord, European manufacturer of wood based panel products, sources all its virgin softwood in the UK from domestic forests, mainly in Scotland where the company manufactures its Sterling brand OSB panels.

Visiting Santiago de compostela in northwest Spain is like taking a step back in history.

For the first time ever, the Imal-Pal group will exceed sales of €110m in 2011, a figure which, in proportion to the number of employees, is probably one of the highest in the wood based panel sector, says the company.

Developing economies in Asia and Latin America have out-performed the developed world, particularly Europe and the US. However, there have been exceptions; resource-rich economies such as Canada and Australia have done far better as they helped to supply the booming developing world economies with basic materials.

State-of-the-art continuous press lines have been taking an increasing share of the total manufacturing capacity of raw boards in Europe and globally. However, the majority of today’s presses are still of the traditional hydraulic type.

It is over half a century since the first particleboard production line, of 12,000m3 a year, was established in Bandar Chamkhaleh, Gilan province in Iran.

The late-2008 boost to spending and consumption in China provided by massive spending on infrastructure and other labour- and material-intensive schemes was reflected in 2009 by a rapid acceleration in economic activity, particularly in the second half of the year and into 2010.

To put the Kronospan group’s  European activities into perspective, it currently has panel making capacities of around nine million m3 of particleboard, five million m3 of MDF and three million m3 of OSB.
At least, those were the figures as at the second quarter of 2010, but the situation is constantly changing. For instance, on the day of my visit at the end of September, the group announced the acquisition of Turkish panel producer SFC in Kastamonu, adding further capacity in both particleboard and MDF to Kronospan’s totals.
The Kronospan group now has 29 wood panel production sites in 24 countries, primarily in ‘greater Europe’, but also two in China and one in the US. Group turnover is more than €2.7bn and the company globally employs about 11,000 people.

It was a gathering of the plywood clan assembled by APA-The Engineered Wood Association and the Plywood Pioneers Association to recall those initial, virtually hand-made, wonders.
John Murphy, APA board chairman, recalled at a morning dedication at the site of the long-gone mill on the bank of the Willamette River: “It was here in 1905 that Portland Manufacturing Company – a small wooden box factory – assembled by hand a primitive, three-ply panel for display at the Lewis and Clark World’s Fair held that year in Portland. As history records, several door manufacturers were impressed with the product, orders began to come in, and the plywood industry was off and running.”
Several descendants of Peter Autzen, one of the mill’s founding fathers, were there to help dedicate a commemorative plaque.
Bill Bennett, president of the Plywood Pioneers Association, said: “It is very gratifying to me personally, and to the entire membership of the Pioneers Association, to finally have this site permanently marked as the birthplace of our industry. I would like to give credit to Bill Keil, long-time industry trade journalist, who has been one of the most persistent advocates of this commemorative plaque project over the years.”
Chairman Murphy told the evening banquet audience of 300: “This is a great industry. We have played a significant role over the past century in building this country – and this entire continent – and we have contributed immeasurably to North American prosperity.
Most of us have been around this industry for a while. We’ve seen some good times and some bad times; we’ve seen history being made and we have made history.”
And for this, there were awards to veteran industry people. The Gustav Carlson Medal for Process Innovation was presented to Fred Fields of Coe Manufacturing Company. He was involved with Coe for 53 years, and owned the company for 23 years until retirement in 2000.
The Bronson Lewis Medal for Industry Growth, named for the executive vice president of the American Plywood Association, 1969 to 1984, was presented to Georgia-Pacific Corporation, the world’s largest softwood plywood manufacturer, with 19 mills in 10 US states..
Paul Ehinger and Don Dierdorff were joint recipients of W E Difford medals for industry contribution. Mr Difford was chief executive of the Douglas Fir Plywood Association for many years.
Mr Ehinger has worked in the forest industry for 50 years, was on the DFPA board for 18 years and president for two years.
Mr Deardorff began his plywood career as DFPA quality supervisor serving all the mills. After leaving the association he eventually formed a partnership to buy Fourply, Inc of which he later became sole owner.
He was elected to the APA board in 1970, where he served for 28 years and as chairman for two of those years. He was also president of the National Forest Products Association for two years.
As the 20th century emerged, the city of Portland, Oregon was becoming one of the leading centres of the US Pacific Coast forest industry. It was all based on the seemingly endless supply of huge, old-growth Douglas fir logs, many of them logged directly to the Willamette and Columbia rivers and rafted to the sawmills which then lined the Portland waterfront.
A century earlier, Thomas Jefferson, the third president of the US, struck a deal with France to buy two million km2 of what is now the nation’s heartland. He doubled the country’s size for US$15m in what has been described as the “greatest real estate deal in history”.
In 1804, he dispatched two army officers, Meriwether Lewis and William Clark, with a small party to check out his sight-unseen bargain. The two-year expedition journeyed to the Pacific Coast, where they wintered before returning homeward.
In 1905, the burgeoning city of Portland opted for a World Fair to celebrate the legendary journey and the then current industry. They attracted more than a million visitors. One of the draws was the huge hilltop Forestry Building built of mammoth fir logs. It was billed as the world’s largest log cabin.
To demonstrate Portland’s industrial sophistication, the organisers encouraged development of special products. They approached Portland Manufacturing Co and the result was plywood.
The theory of plywood was not new. Egyptians had used handmade veneer in their tombs thousands of years ago. And England, France, Scandinavia, China and Russia, among others, had worked with rudimentary plywood. The US Midwest had seen work with the product.
But Portland Manufacturing, which had produced boxes and packing materials, started the work in the Pacific Northwest. For a long period it would be the leading producing region.
That pioneering production was strictly a three-ply hand operation. A six-man crew used a St Joe lathe to peel veneer. They dried it in a lumber steam dry kiln and used animal glue warmed over a coal fire and swabbed onto the sheets with hand brushes.
The crew cobbled together a wooden press using hand operated house jacks to apply pressure. A single press load could be laid up in a day and pressing took all night.
The hand made plywood was displayed in the 105ft x 209ft Forestry Building which burned in a huge 1964 fire, destroying all the contents.
Portland Manufacturing itself had the same fate in 1910, but reopened the same year. More modern equipment was installed in line with changing technological times.

Wood products companies in the US are under pressure from the economy, environmental regulation and competing materials, says Robert Glowinski, AWC executive director.
The AWC believes that no single company can achieve the changes necessary to ensure a level playing field and survival: Now, more than ever, strength is to be found in numbers.
“The new coalition will ensure that wood products manufacturers have a broadly supported, unified and powerful voice so we can secure a strong future for the industry in the face of an onslaught of upcoming challenges,” says Mr Glowinski.
The AWC provides an organizational structure for wood products companies and associations to work together on building codes and standards, green building policy issues and a focused set of environmental regulations. This gives the industry the resources, clout and credibility to achieve policies that can secure it a strong future.
The AWC is seeking to expand the force and effectiveness of its advocacy efforts by ensuring they reflect the full range and diversity of America’s wood products industry because such a broad base of support not only enhances advocacy before Congress and key policy-making bodies, but also helps ensure that all those who benefit from these efforts are supporting them.
To achieve a robust marketplace for wood products, encourage sensible environmental regulation and advocate that wood is the best choice in green building, the AWC has focused on three distinct areas where the industry’s collective efforts have secured significant achievements and continue to set high goals for future progress:
• AWC ensures the continued acceptance of wood products in markets regulated by building codes/standards and maximizes opportunities for wood’s use in residential and commercial construction by speaking up for all wood products before building code-writing bodies in the US
• With a new wave of regulations under development by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), which could cost wood products companies more than US$2bn in new regulatory costs, AWC advocates commonsense environmental policies
• With the green building market estimated to reach as much as US$140bn by 2013, securing a strong place for wood in the myriad green building codes and rating systems is essential to future growth.
Building codes/standards
The AWC’s engineers and experts work exclusively to maintain and expand market opportunities for wood through building codes and standards, in the face of stiff competition from materials such as concrete and steel. No single company can represent the broad industry before building code authorities, nor maintain the technical expertise required to engage full-time with the leading construction code-writing bodies, but the AWC can and does.
Over the past year, the AWC has:
• Defeated efforts by steel interests to grab market share by creating lower energy-efficiency requirements for steel studs than for wood studs
• Protected wood panels’ dominant place in the residential sheathing market against efforts to impose unsubstantiated energy requirements that would have favoured foam sheathing
• Promoted the use of I-joists and trusses in residential construction by defeating proposals that would have imposed additional, unsubstantiated requirements on engineered wood products compared to competing materials.
For the AWC to continue to advocate for the industry, it needs broad industry participation and the resources that come with it. In 2010, specific challenges include:
• Building codes: ICC code cycle for the new 2012 code is under way and includes over 2,000 proposed code changes
• Earthquake codes: Requiring light-gauge steel to meet the same high seismic performance levels as wood frame construction
• Energy efficiency: Recapturing markets lost to energy-performance requirements biased towards competing materials and increasing regulation resulting from new energy legislation
• Fire safety: Educating the fire community on the safety and performance of all wood products and responding to the current fire service focus on engineered wood products
• Structural specifications: Opposing substitution of wood structural panels with foam sheathing and preventing technically unjustified changes to the IRC’s bracing code.
Environmental regulation
Over the past decade, through its affiliation with the American Forest & Paper Association (AF&PA), the wood products industry has been very effective in shaping regulatory policies.
By closely engaging with key agency staff, possessing a thorough knowledge of the rule-making process, and by constructively and openly sharing information about manufacturing processes, the industry has developed significant credibility with agency policy makers.
This has led to: Successfully shaping EPA’s survey of how proposed Wood MACT (maximum achievable control technology) changes would impact the industry; favourable reception at the EPA of recommended work practices for proposed new kiln regulations; retention of start-up, shutdown and malfunction exemptions from the Wood MACT; providing industry input to Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA) and other government entities that engage in rule making pertaining to workplace safety; coordinating industry input to private organisations, such as the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), which help establish consensus standards that influence workplace safety procedures.
The threatened US$2bn cost of new EPA regulations for wood products companies are in response to a recent court decision overturning the 2004 Wood MACT and are expected to also include:
• A reassessment of the 2004 MACT for dryers and presses that could further tighten existing limits
• Residual Risk Review: EPA must determine by 2012 if public health risks remain, even after the 2004 MACT’s implementation
• Revisiting all start-up, shut-down and malfunction (SSM) exemptions: This review is being considered in light of a recent court decision that calls into question all SSM provisions which currently provide significant operating flexibility
• Setting a first-ever New Source Performance Standard (NSPS) for the industry: Though discussed in the late 1970s, an NSPS for wood products has never been pursued by EPA, which would set limits for a suite of additional air pollutants.
EPA is looking to the industry for leadership in developing a unified industry strategy for these environmental issues. That unity will be essential to our success and to help prevent environmental opponents from exploiting differences within the industry to weaken our advocacy and see the most stringent possible regulations imposed.
Green building
More attention than ever before is being paid to how buildings impact the environment, including the choice of materials used in construction and how those materials help conserve energy during operation.
Wood is the perfect green building material because it is renewable, stores carbon which reduces greenhouse gases and is energy-efficient. But winning acceptance for wood is a challenge, as competing materials, and certain environmental groups, seek to control the US green building market.
Also, some green building rating systems, such as the US Green Building Council’s well-known LEED rating system, contain scientifically indefensible biases against wood and many US-sourced wood products. LEED is aggressively seeking a government-sanctioned monopoly on rating systems, which would seriously harm the use of US wood products.
The industry has fought hard over the past decade to set the record straight on wood and has made impressive progress: It has helped bring the wood-friendly Green Globes rating system to the US, offering the first competition to LEED; secured Green Globes inclusion in the federal schools and stimulus bills; prevented LEED-only legislation in 40 states; and won adoption in 19 states of the Green Globes rating system.
It has also influenced green criteria being included in the ASHRAE green building minimum requirements standard and gained a position on the International Code Council’s oversight committee for its new green building model code – the only wood interest on a committee that will write the first national green building code, which can be enforced like a mandatory building code.
Finally, it has served on the Green Globes and National Green Building Standard Committees, ensuring that wood products are rewarded for their environmental characteristics and for their positive contributions.