Quality of african mahogany and eucalypts wood residues for briquetting

1Citations
Citations of this article
1Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

The residues from wood processing are an opportunity for energy use, and the briquetting is an efficient process of concentrating the available energy from forest biomass. Therefore, this work aimed to evaluate different compositions of residues from African mahogany (Khaya ivorensis and Khaya senegalensis) and eucalypts (Eucalyptus grandis x Eucalyptus urophylla) woods for the production of briquettes. To do so, five composites were tested with different proportions of residues (100% eucalypts, 75% eucalypts + 25% African mahogany, 50% eucalypts + 50% African mahogany, 25% eucalypts + 75% African mahogany e 100% African mahogany) and submitted to analysis chemical and physical (total extracts, total lignin, ash content, moisture content, higher calorific value and bulk density). The briquettes were produced at a temperature of 120°C, pressure of 100 kgf cm-2 and compaction and cooling times of 5 and 7 minutes, respectively and were submitted to physical-mechanical analysis (apparent relative density and resistance to axial compression). The compositions with the highest percentage of African mahogany had higher extractives and ash content, and a greater calorific value. For the briquettes from compositions with higher percentages of eucalyptus, there was less apparent relative density and less resistance to axial compression. Despite this, the residues of these species have potential for energy generation. However, the briquettes with a higher percentage of African mahogany in the composition have greater energy potential and are, mechanically, more resistant.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Souza, C. de O., Arantes, M. D. C., Pinto, J. de A., da Silva, J. G. M., Carneiro, M. F., de Lima, A. C. B., & Passos, R. R. (2022). Quality of african mahogany and eucalypts wood residues for briquetting. Ciencia Florestal, 32(2), 637–652. https://doi.org/10.5902/1980509843299

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free