influence of thermally conductive fillers on the …

298
INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF WAFERBOARD By KATIE S. TORREY A THESIS Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE IN CHEMICAL ENGINEERING MICHIGAN TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY 2001 Copyright 2001 Katie Suzanne Torrey

Upload: others

Post on 03-Dec-2021

6 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE PHYSICAL

PROPERTIES OF WAFERBOARD

By

KATIE S. TORREY

A THESIS

Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements

for the degree of

MASTER OF SCIENCE IN CHEMICAL ENGINEERING

MICHIGAN TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY

2001

Copyright 2001 Katie Suzanne Torrey

Page 2: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …
Page 3: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

This thesis, “Influence Of Thermally Conductive Fillers On The Physical Properties Of

Waferboard,” is hereby approved in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree

of MASTER OF SCIENCE IN CHEMICAL ENGINEERING.

DEPARTMENT Chemical Engineering

Signatures:

Thesis Advisor

Department Chair

Date

Dr. Julia A. King

Dr. Michael E. Mullins

Page 4: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …
Page 5: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

Abstract

Influence Of Thermally Conductive Fillers On ThePhysical Properties Of Waferboard

By: Katie TorreyAdvisor: Dr. Julia A. King

Michigan Technological UniversityDepartment of Chemical Engineering

Oriented strandboard (OSB) is a wood composite commonly used in the

construction of residential buildings. It is manufactured by combining rectangular wood

flakes with a thermosetting resin, arranging the flakes in layers that are oriented 90

degrees from each other, and hot-pressing the mixture to form a rigid board. Waferboard

is identical to OSB except that the layers of flakes are not oriented - they are random -

which makes it easier to manufacture in a laboratory setting.

The manufacture of OSB could be improved by developing a method to shorten

the cure time of the resin during hot-pressing, which could speed production or improve

overall board quality. This thesis explores whether the physical properties of waferboard,

as an indirect measure of degree of resin cure, could be improved by adding thermally

conductive fillers. It is theorized that the thermally conductive fillers would increase heat

transfer into the center of the board during hot-pressing causing a greater degree of resin

cure. It was also assumed that a greater degree of resin cure is implied by higher internal

bond strength. The fillers are also more hydrophobic than the wood flakes, which could

decrease the thickness swell of waferboard.

Five thermally conductive fillers were studied: Thermocarb™ Specialty Graphite

and coarse Thermocarb™ Specialty Graphite, synthetic graphite manufactured by

Conoco, Inc.; Lonza Manufactured Graphite, synthetic graphite manufactured by Timcal;

Signature® Crystalline Flake Graphite, natural graphite distributed by Superior Graphite

Co.; and Boron Nitride Powder HCP, boron nitride powder manufactured by Advanced

Ceramics Corp. The fillers were added at a level of 1 g filler/100 g dry flakes and

Page 6: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

Abstract

compared with control boards that did not contain any filler. The properties tested were

flexural modulus of elasticity, modulus of rupture, internal bond strength, 24-hour soak

thickness swell, and 2-hour boil thickness swell. Waferboard was manufactured at

different press times in several different experiments using phenol formaldehyde resin at a

loading of 4 g resin solids/100 g dry flakes.

The flexural modulus of elasticity and rupture significantly decreased in

waferboard containing some of the fillers, but not below acceptable values for commercial

OSB. The internal bond strength was significantly improved from 348 kPa to

approximately 380 kPa in waferboard containing coarse Thermocarb™ Specialty

Graphite, Lonza Manufactured Graphite, and Boron Nitride Powder HCP at a total press

time of 5 minutes. Only waferboard containing coarse Thermocarb™ Specialty Graphite

showed decreased thickness swell. This decrease was from 30% to 24% at a 4 minute

press time.

The temperature profile of the board during pressing, viscosity of the resin/filler

mixtures, and thermal conductivity of the waferboard and resin/filler mixtures were also

measured. The thermal conductivity of the waferboard containing filler was unchanged at

0.129 W/mK, compared to the control . The thermal conductivity of the resin increased

from approximately 0.3 W/mK to over 1 W/mK with addition of the thermally conductive

fillers.

Page 7: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

Acknowledgments

Acknowledgments

I would like to thank my advisor, Dr. Julia King, for her moral support throughout

my time in graduate school. I would also like to thank my committee members: Dr. Tony

Rogers, Dr. Ibrahim Miskioglu, and Dr. John Sutherland.

I would like to thank those companies who supported this project: Conoco, Inc.

for the funding and technical assistance; Superior Graphite Co., Advanced Ceramics

Corp., Borden Chemical Co., Strandwood Molding, Inc., and Lousiana Pacific Corp. for

their time, advice, and materials.

I am very grateful for the help and guidance I received from the wood science

faculty and staff of the MTU Forestry Department. In particular, I am greatly indebted to

the technical advise, assistance, and friendship of Bill Yrjana.

I would also like to thank my parents, David and Debbie Shafer. They have always

unselfishly shown their love and encouragement.

Lastly and most importantly, I would like to thank my husband, David Torrey Jr.,

for putting up with me through this entire process. :)

Page 8: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …
Page 9: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

9

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

List of Figures.................................................................................................................. 13

List of Tables ................................................................................................................... 17

Chapter 1. Introduction ................................................................................................ 21

Chapter 2. Oriented Strandboard ................................................................................ 23

2.1 Description and History of OSB .................................................................... 23

2.2 How OSB is Made ......................................................................................... 25

2.3 Basic Principles of Wood Composite Pressing .............................................. 29

2.3.1 Description of the Press .................................................................. 30

2.3.2 Heat Transfer Modes During Pressing ............................................ 31

2.3.3 Description of the Core Temperature Profile During Pressing ....... 33

2.3.4 Formation of the Vertical Density Profile ....................................... 36

2.4 Research Opportunities Using Thermally Conductive Fillers In OSB ........... 39

2.5 Applicable Wood Composites Research ........................................................ 41

2.5.1 Addition of Fillers In Phenol Formaldehyde Resin Systems ........... 41

2.5.2 Effect of Fillers On Curing Kinetics of Phenol Formaldehyde Resin

Systems............................................................................................... 42

2.5.3 Effect of ThermocarbTM Specialty Graphite Loading In Waferboard

On Internal Bond Strength .................................................................. 44

2.5.4 Unsteady Contacting State Theory ................................................. 45

2.5.5 Wood Failure As Indication of Internal Bond Strength .................. 45

2.5.6 Modeling Hot-Pressing Temperature Gradients ............................. 47

Chapter 3. Experimental Materials ............................................................................. 50

3.1 Strands ........................................................................................................... 50

3.2 Phenol Formaldehyde Resin ........................................................................... 54

3.3 Thermally Conductive Fillers ......................................................................... 57

Page 10: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

10

Table of Contents

3.3.1 Synthetic Graphite .......................................................................... 58

3.3.2 Natural Graphite ............................................................................. 59

3.3.3 Boron Nitride .................................................................................. 62

3.3.4 Comparison of Filler Properties ...................................................... 64

Chapter 4. Experimental Methods ............................................................................... 76

4.1 Waferboard Fabrication.................................................................................. 76

4.1.1 Waferboard Fabrication Equipment ................................................ 76

4.1.2 Experiment 1 Experimental Procedure and Naming Scheme ......... 81

4.1.3 Experiments 2 and 3 Experimental Procedure and Naming Scheme84

4.2 Waferboard Test Methods ............................................................................... 87

4.2.1 Panel Conditioning and Cutting ...................................................... 87

4.2.2 Density ............................................................................................ 91

4.2.3 Moisture content ............................................................................. 92

4.2.4 Internal Bond .................................................................................. 93

4.2.5 Static Bending ................................................................................. 96

4.2.6 24-Hour Thickness Swell ................................................................ 98

4.2.7 2-Hour Boil Thickness Swell ........................................................ 100

4.2.8 Temperature Profile ...................................................................... 100

4.2.9 Thermal Conductivity ................................................................... 101

4.3 Resin Test Methods...................................................................................... 103

4.3.1 Viscosity........................................................................................ 103

4.3.2 Thermal Conductivity ................................................................... 104

4.4 Statistical Analysis Methods ........................................................................ 108

4.4.1 Two Sample t-Test ........................................................................ 109

4.4.2 Analysis of Variance...................................................................... 110

Chapter 5. Experimental Results and Discussion ..................................................... 113

5.1 Experiment 1 Results: Summer 2000 Waferboard Manufacturing ............. 113

Page 11: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

11

Table of Contents

5.1.1 Summary of Testing Results ......................................................... 113

5.1.2 Vertical Density Profile Testing .................................................... 120

5.1.3 Initial Conclusions ........................................................................ 121

5.1.4 Experiment 1 Concerns and Response .......................................... 123

5.2 Experiment 2 Results: Summer 2001 Waferboard Manufacturing, 5 minute

press time ...................................................................................................... 129

5.2.1 Observations ................................................................................. 130

5.2.2 Analysis of the First Three Days of Data ...................................... 130

5.2.3 Summary of Testing Results ......................................................... 133

5.2.3 Analysis Including the Last Three Days of Data ........................... 142

5.2.4 Experiment 2 Conclusions ............................................................ 147

5.3 Experiment 3 Results: Summer 2001 OSB Manufacturing, 4.5 minute press

time ............................................................................................................... 148

5.3.1 Results and Data Analysis ............................................................. 148

5.3.2 Experiment 3 Conclusions ............................................................ 152

5.4 Temperature Profiles .................................................................................... 152

5.5 Viscosity....................................................................................................... 154

5.6 Thermal Conductivity .................................................................................. 156

5.6.1 Waferboard Thermal Conductivity Results ................................... 156

5.6.2 Resin/Filler Thermal Conductivity Testing.................................... 158

Chapter 6. Observations, Conclusions and Proposed Future Work ....................... 159

6.1 Observations ................................................................................................ 159

6.2 Conclusions .................................................................................................. 159

6.3 Proposed Future Work ................................................................................. 161

6.3.1 Manufacturing ............................................................................... 161

6.3.2 Mechanisms .................................................................................. 162

6.3.3 Modeling ....................................................................................... 164

Page 12: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

12

Table of Contents

Reference List ................................................................................................................ 165

Appendix A. Ro-tap Data ........................................................................................... 171

Appendix B. Waferboard Formulation Sample Calculation ................................... 173

Appendix C. Experiment 1 Data ................................................................................ 175

Appendix D. Experiment 2 Data ................................................................................ 213

Appendix E. Experiment 3 Data ................................................................................ 272

Appendix F. Temperature Profile Data ...................................................................... 287

Appendix G. Viscosity Data ........................................................................................ 293

Appendix H. Thermal Conductivity Data ................................................................. 296

Page 13: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

13

List of Figures

List of Figures

Figure 2-1. Three-dimensional and top views of the layout and alignment of OSB ....... 23

Figure 2-2. Process flow diagram for the commercial manufacturing of OSB ............... 25

Figure 2-3. A basic laboratory press for making wood composites ................................ 30

Figure 2-4. Heat and moisture transfer within mat at the beginning of pressing............. 31

Figure 2-5. Heat and moisture transfer within the mat at the end of pressing ................ 32

Figure 2-6. Phases of temperature change of mat core during pressing .......................... 34

Figure 2-7. Typical density change through the thickness of waferboard (Kelly, 1977) . 36

Figure 2-8. Formation of the vertical density profile of OSB during pressing (Wang,

2000). T1, T2, T3, and T4 indicate different thicknesses of the mat during the entire

pressing process, including press closing and press opening ...................................... 38

Figure 3-1. MTU 1.5-meter diameter disk flaker used to make strands for Experiments

2 and 3. .......................................................................................................................51

Figure 3-2. Size distribution from ro-tap analysis of strands used for Experiments 1, 2,

and 3. .......................................................................................................................... 53

Figure 3-3. Chemical reactions of phenol formaldehyde (PF) resin (Marra, 1992). ....... 55

Figure 3-4. Schematic of froth floatation separation process (Wills, 1985). ................... 61

Figure 3-5. Thermal conductivity of epoxy containing various thermally conductive

fillers (“Advanced Ceramic Powders and Shapes”, 1999). ......................................... 63

Figure 3-6. Thermocarb™ Specialty Graphite particle size distribution (Personal

Communication, 8-23-2000). ...................................................................................... 66

Figure 3-7. Particle size distribution for Coarse Thermocarb™ Specialty Graphite

(Personal Communication, 8-23-2000). ...................................................................... 66

Figure 3-8. Particle size distribution of Lonza Manufactured Graphite (Personal

Communication, 8-23-2000). ...................................................................................... 67

Figure 3-9. Particle size distribution of Signature® Crystalline Flake Graphite

(Personal Communication, 8-23-2000). ...................................................................... 67

Page 14: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

14

List of Figures

Figure 3-10. Particle size distribution for Boron Nitride Powder (Personal

Communication, 8-23-2000). ...................................................................................... 68

Figure 3-11. SEM micrograph of Thermocarb™ Specialty Graphite (Personal

Communication, 10-10-2000). .................................................................................... 72

Figure 3-12. SEM micrograph of Coarse Thermocarb™ Specialty Graphite (Personal

Communication, 10-10-2000). .................................................................................... 73

Figure 3-13. SEM micrograph of Lonza Manufactured Graphite (Personal

Communication, 10-10-2000). .................................................................................... 73

Figure 3-14. SEM micrograph of Signature® Crystalline Flake Graphite (Personal

Communication, 10-10-2000). .................................................................................... 74

Figure 3-15. SEM micrograph of Boron Nitride Powder HCP BN at 1000X

magnification (“Boron Nitride Powder Grade HCP”, 2001). ..................................... 74

Figure 4-1. Bench top mixer used for mixing filler and resin during waferboard

manufacturing. ............................................................................................................ 77

Figure 4-2. Drum blender used during waferboard manufacturing. ................................ 78

Figure 4-3. Forming box used to form mats during waferboard manufacturing. ............ 79

Figure 4-4. Waferboard mat prior to pressing. ................................................................ 79

Figure 4-5. Francis hydraulic press used in panel manufacturing. ................................... 80

Figure 4-6. Francis hydraulic press pressing a mat. ....................................................... 81

Figure 4-7. Conditioning room where boards and samples were stored at a constant

temperature and humidity. ........................................................................................... 88

Figure 4-8. Cutting diagram used for Experiment 1 boards, indicating tests performed

on each board. ............................................................................................................. 89

Figure 4-9. Cutting diagram used for Experiment 2 and 3 boards, indicating tests

performed on each board. ........................................................................................... 90

Figure 4-10. ASTM specifications for the IB test specimen (“Standard Test Methods

for Evaluating..”, 2000). ............................................................................................. 94

Page 15: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

15

List of Figures

Figure 4-11. Universal testing machine testing an internal bond test. ............................. 95

Figure 4-12. Typical load verses displacement curve for a well-bonded waferboard

internal bond test specimen, in English units............................................................... 95

Figure 4-13. Set up for the static bending test. ............................................................... 96

Figure 4-14. Typical load verses displacement curve for a well-bonded waferboard

static bending test specimen, in English units. ............................................................ 98

Figure 4-15. Diagram of measurement positions used in both thickness swell tests. ...... 99

Figure 4-16. Diagram of thermal conductivity test method (“Operation &

Maintenance..”, 1997). .............................................................................................. 102

Figure 4-17. Schematic of the mold used to make void-free PF resin samples. ............ 105

Figure 5-1. Density profile summary of the Experiment 1 control samples. ................. 121

Figure 5-2. Illustration of the waferboard pressing cycle and the relationship between

press closing time, press time, and total press time. ................................................. 127

Figure 5-3. Distribution of IB and Density within board C2-C-B4. .............................. 132

Figure 5-4. Center samples used in Experiment 2 data analysis. ................................... 133

Figure 5-5. MinitabTM ANOVA output for Experiment 2 sample-to-sample variance

of Day 1 control boards IB data (kPa). ..................................................................... 138

Figure 5-6. MinitabTM ANOVA output for Experiment 2 day-filler analysis of the first

three days of IB data (kPa). ...................................................................................... 139

Figure 5-7. Minitab ANOVA output for Experiment 2 day-to-day variance using only

Day 1 and Day 2 IB data (kPa). ................................................................................ 141

Figure 5-8. Board-filler MinitabTM ANOVA analysis of Experiment 2 using all five

days of IB data (kPa). ............................................................................................... 145

Figure 5-9. Board-filler MinitabTM ANOVA analysis of Experiment 2 using last three

days of IB data (kPa). ............................................................................................... 146

Figure 5-10. Day-filler MinitabTM ANOVA analysis of Experiment 3 IB results (kPa). 150

Page 16: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

16

List of Figures

Figure 5-11. Internal temperature profile of control boards and TC boards during

pressing. .................................................................................................................... 153

Figure 5-12. Close up of fast temperature rise of internal temperature profile of

control boards and TC boards during pressing. ........................................................ 154

Figure 5-13. Change in viscosity of PF resin with the addition of the thermally

conductive fillers. ...................................................................................................... 155

Page 17: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

17

List of Tables

List of Tables

Table 2-1. Differential scanning calorimeter results determining the curing kinetic

parameters of PF resin and PF resin containing ThermocarbTM Specialty Graphite

(Matuana, 2001). ........................................................................................................ 43

Table 2-2. Summary of internal bond (IB) data from 11-mm OSB made with varying

levels of TC filler and pressed for 2 minutes (Matuana, 2001). .................................. 44

Table 3-1. Results of ro-tap sieve analysis on strands used for Experiments 1, 2, and 3. 52

Table 3-2. Physical properties at the time of manufacture of Cascophen® OS-707 phenol

formaldehyde resin (“Cascophen OS-707 Data Sheet”, 2000). .................................. 57

Table 3-3. Comparison of properties between hexagonal boron nitride and cubic boron

nitride (Lelonis, 1994). ............................................................................................... 62

Table 3-4. Summary of particle size results for the thermally conductive fillers in µm. .. 65

Table 3-4. Aspect ratio for thermally conductive fillers. ................................................. 69

Table 3-5. Major constituents of the thermally conductive fillers in wt % ...................... 70

Table 3-6. Trace metals (ppm) in the thermally conductive fillers................................... 70

Table 3-7. Miscellaneous physical properties of the thermally conductive fillers ............ 71

Table 3-8. Typical prices of the three different filler types. ............................................. 71

Table 4-1. Critical t-values for 2-tail 95% confidence interval (Miller, 1985). ............. 110

Table 4-2. ANOVA analysis used to analyze Experiment 2 and 3 data. ........................ 111

Table 5-1. A summary of the number of boards made in Experiment 1 with each filler, at

each press time. ......................................................................................................... 114

Table 5-2. Experiment 1 internal bond (IB) results and t-test determining the statistical

significance between control values and the five ...................................................... 115

Table 5-3. Experiment 1 flexural modulus of elasticity (MOE) results and t-test

determining the statistical significance between control values and the five filler values.

.................................................................................................................................. 116

Page 18: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

18

List of Tables

Table 5-4. Experiment 1 modulus of rupture (MOR) results and t-test determining the

statistical significance between control values and the five filler values. .................. 117

Table 5-5. Experiment 1 24-hour soak thickness swell (TS) results and t-test determining

the statistical significance between control values and the five filler values. ............ 118

Table 5-6. Experiment 1 2-hour boil thickness swell (BTS) results and t-test determining

the statistical significance between control values and the five filler values. ............ 119

Table 5-7. IB Data from Experiment 1 for Control boards made with a 4 minute press

time. .......................................................................................................................... 123

Table 5-8. Minimum, maximum, and average closing times for all 4 minute boards made

in Experiment 1. ........................................................................................................ 128

Table 5-9. Summary of the first three days of Experiment 2 IB data (kPa), containing

center 12 IB samples. ................................................................................................ 134

Table 5-10. IB results (kPa) from Experiment 1, 4 minute control boards, showing the

relative size of the standard deviation as a percent of the average. .......................... 135

Table 5-11. IB results (kPa) from Experiment 2 Control boards, showing the relative size

of the standard deviation as a percent of the average. .............................................. 136

Table 5-12. Summary of IB data (kPa) from Day 4 and Day 5 of Experiment 2. ......... 143

Table 5-13. Summary of Experiment 3 IB results (kPa). .............................................. 149

Table 5-14. Summary of control IB data for Experiment 3 (kPa). ................................ 151

Table 5-15. Thermal conductivity results of control and CTC boards from Experiment 2.

.................................................................................................................................. 157

Table 5-16. Thermal conductivity (W/mK) of the resin and the resin/fillers at 55oC. .. 158

Table A-1. Ro-tap data for 5-23-2000 LP strands. ....................................................... 171

Table A-2. Ro-tap data for 9-8-2000 LP strands. ......................................................... 171

Table A-3. Ro-tap data for 4-17-2001 MTU strands. ................................................... 171

Table A-4. Ro-tap data for 6-25-2001 MTU strands. ................................................... 172

Table C-1. Experiment 1 individual internal bond test results. ...................................... 175

Page 19: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

19

List of Tables

Table C-2. Experiment 1 individual static bending test results...................................... 185

Table C-3. Experiment 1 individual 24-hour soak thickness swell test results. ............. 193

Table C-4. Experiment 1 individual 2-hour boil thickness swell test results. ................ 199

Table C-5. Experiment 1 individual moisture test results. ............................................. 205

Table C-6. Experiment 1 individual average board density test results. ........................ 209

Table D-1. Individual Experiment 2 internal bond test results. ..................................... 213

Table D-2. Individual Experiment 2 moisture test results. ............................................ 269

Table E-1. Experiment 3 individual internal bond test results. ...................................... 272

Table E-2. Experiment 3 individual moisture test results. ............................................. 285

Table F-1. Control core temperature data. .................................................................... 287

Table F-2. 1 wt. % ThermocarbTM Specialty Graphite core temperature data. ............. 289

Table F-3. 0.5 wt. % ThermocarbTM Specialty Graphite core temperature data. .......... 291

Table G-1. Mixing data for viscosity measurements of resin/filler mixtures. ................ 294

Table G-2. Viscosity measurements of resin/filler mixtures. ......................................... 295

Table H-1. Thermal conductivity data from selected Experiment 2 waferboard. .......... 296

Table H-2. Thermal conductivity data from resin/filler mixtures. ................................. 297

Table H-3. Density measurements of resin/filler thermal conductivity samples. ........... 298

Page 20: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

20

List of Tables

Page 21: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

21

Introduction

Chapter 1. Introduction

Oriented strandboard (OSB), waferboard, and other wood particle composites are

manufactured by combining wood pieces with a thermosetting resin and hot-pressing the

mixture to form a rigid board. Researchers developed these composites to create markets

for low value materials, and even today this industry is eager to adopt methods that

decrease costs and to embrace new technologies which further improve their products.

This thesis focuses on a technology that could be used to improve the manufacture of

OSB.

OSB is composed of thin, rectangular wood flakes that are arranged in three to

five layers. In each layer the flakes are aligned in a specific direction, and each layer is

oriented 90 degrees from each other. The orientation of the wood flakes gives OSB

strength properties comparable to plywood, its chief competitor in the structural panel

market. Structural panels are commonly used in the construction of residential structures.

The main concept driving this research was to develop a method to shorten the

cure time of OSB during hot-pressing through the addition of thermally conductive fillers.

It was theorized that the addition of thermally conductive fillers would allow the heat

during hot-pressing to reach the center of the board faster, curing the resin in the center of

the board sooner, and consequently allowing equivalent boards to be made with shorter

press times. In addition to being highly thermally conductive, the fillers studied were also

more hydrophobic than the wood flakes. The hydrophobic characteristic of these fillers

could also decrease the thickness swelling of OSB.

The manufacture of commercial OSB could be improved with this technology by

decreasing press time, which would speed production and reduce energy requirements of

the press; by improving overall board quality at the same press time, which would

decrease quality control costs; or by contributing to the ability to make thicker boards,

which would open up new market opportunities for OSB. This technology also has the

potential to be applied to other types of wood composites.

Page 22: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

22

Chapter 1

While the intended commercial application of the research presented in this thesis

is OSB, the research was done on waferboard, a similar wood composite. Waferboard is

manufactured identically to OSB, with the exception that the wood flakes are not aligned

in any specific direction. Waferboard flakes are random, while OSB flakes are oriented.

Adding fillers to improve the effectiveness of a resin is not a new idea. A filler is

defined as a relatively non-adhesive substance that is added to an adhesive to improve its

working properties, durability, strength or other qualities (“Standard Terminology of

Adhesives”, 2001). Research into the use of filler materials similar in nature to wood,

such as wood flour, has been reported. This and other research relevant to this thesis are

discussed in Chapter 2. However, no evidence of research specifically on the use of

thermally conductive fillers in waferboard or OSB has been found. This thesis explores

whether the physical properties of waferboard, as an indirect measure of degree of resin

cure, could be improved by adding thermally conductive fillers. Improved curing may

reduce pressing cycle times.

The research presented in this thesis focused on testing physical properties of

laboratory-manufactured waferboard containing one of five different thermally conductive

fillers and comparing the results to waferboard containing no filler. The thermally

conductive fillers included three types of synthetic graphite, one natural flake graphite, and

one boron nitride power. A complete description of the fillers used in this research is

found in Chapter 3.

Four separate experiments generated waferboard for testing of internal bond

strength, modulus of elasticity, modulus of rupture, 24-hour soak thickness swell, 2-hour

boil thickness swell, thermal conductivity, and temperature profiles during pressing. It

was assumed that better internal bond strength implied a greater degree of resin cure.

Additional testing on the thermal conductivity and viscosity of the resin/filler mixtures

allowed for the characterization of the effects of fillers on the resin system.

Page 23: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

23

Oriented Strandboard

Chapter 2. Oriented Strandboard

This chapter discusses many aspects of oriented strandboard (OSB). It begins

with a characterization and history of the material and describes how it is made in a

commercial plant. Other topics covered are details of the hot-pressing of wood

composites and various research and opportunities, relevant to this thesis.

2.1 Description and History of OSB

Oriented strandboard or OSB is a building material that competes with plywood

for use in residential and low-rise commercial building construction. OSB is a structural

panel and is most commonly used for subfloors and underlayments, wall sheathing, and

roof sheathing. It is also used for the outer skins of foam-core sandwich panels called

structural insulated panels (SIPS) and the vertical web pieces of wood I-beams (OSB

Performance By Design, 2000). A schematic of OSB is shown in Figure 2-1.

Face

Core

Core

Face

Face

Core

Core

Face

Figure 2-1. Three-dimensional and top views of the layout and alignment of OSB.

Page 24: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

24

Chapter 2

OSB is characterized by layers of rectangular wood chips bonded under heat and

pressure with a waterproof, thermosetting resin (Glover, 1985). The wood chips, also

called flakes or strands, are arranged in alternating, perpendicular layers, to imitate the

structural effect of plywood’s longitudinal and crosswise veneer grains (Panels, 1996).

OSB is composed of two outer layers and one to three middle layers. The outer or face

layer strands are aligned along the length of the board. The middle or core layer strands

are usually aligned crosswise at a 90o angle to the face layers.

OSB evolved from waferboard, which was invented by Dr. James Clark in the late

1940’s and early 1950’s to create a marketable product for low-grade “free woods” such

as Aspen (Columbia Engineering, 2001). Waferboard was made from randomly placed

flat squares of wood called wafers. The wafers were cut parallel with the grain of the

logs and were usually about 75 mm square in size (Glover, 1985). Waferboard strength

properties were approximately equal in all directions in the plane of the panel and the

strength came from the relatively large surface areas of bonded wafers (Glover, 1985;

Panels, 1996). Commercial production of waferboard began in 1962 in eastern Canada

and the Great Lake states (Panels, 1996).

The strength properties of waferboard were improved in the 1970’s with the

development of oriented waferboard. Oriented waferboard was made from longitudinally

arranged rectangular wafers in the face layers, with the usual random waferboard core in-

between (Panels, 1996). OSB, with all of its layers aligned, was developed in the early

1980’s, in an attempt to produce even stiffer boards with more predictable engineering

characteristics that could compete more directly with the same strength and stiffness

characteristics of plywood (Fisette, 1997).

OSB surpassed plywood for use in residential construction in 1995, and today it is

a low cost substitute for plywood. When compared to plywood, OSB is generally viewed

as less dimensionally stable in humid and wet environments, but overall a more consistent

product (Fisette, 1997).

Page 25: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

25

Oriented Strandboard

2.2 How OSB is Made

Below is a general process flow diagram for the manufacture of OSB. Numbers in

the flow chart correspond to the illustrations and descriptions found in the text directly

below. The illustrations were used with permission from the Structural Board Association

(www.sba-osb.com).

Figure 2-2. Process flow diagram for the commercial manufacturing of OSB.

Page 26: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

26

Chapter 2

1. Wood Yard. After harvesting, logs

are sorted according to species and stored in

the wood yard. In Canada and northern states,

the primary raw material is Aspen. Other wood

species such as Southern Pine, White Birch,

Red Maple, Sweetgum, and Yellow Poplar are

used depending upon availability (Wood

Handbook, 1999). Round logs, approximately 2.5 meters long are usually preferred, but

improvements to debarking and flaking technologies are allowing a larger variety of wood

species, sizes and shapes to be used (Wood-Based Panel Products, 2001).

2. Heat. The logs are soaked in warm

water in conditioning ponds to thaw and soften

the wood before being sent up the jackladder

and into the mill. Conditioning logs helps to

remove grit and sand trapped in the bark, aids

in removing bark during debarking, helps to

make more uniform strands, and also reduces

flaker knife wear (Panels, 1996).

3. Debark. Logs that are too large in

diameter are sorted out before the rest are sent

through the debarker, where most of the bark is

removed. The shredded bark is usually burned

for heat, but other innovative uses are being

investigated. Research is also focused on

debarking frozen logs (Wood-Based Panel

Products, 2001). Logs could then be conditioned after debarking, which would be more

efficient at warming the logs since the bark would be removed. Also much of the dirt sent

Page 27: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

27

Oriented Strandboard

through the flaker would be eliminated, which would extend flaker knife life and improve

strand quality.

4. Flake. Flaking is also called

stranding. This is where the logs are shaved

into strands parallel to the grain of the logs,

anywhere from 16 mm wide by 75 to 152 mm

long. They are generally 0.6 to 0.7 mm thick

(Wood Handbook, 1999). The exact size and

thickness of the strands varies from plant to

plant, but they usually have an aspect ratio

(strand length divided by width) of at least 3 for improved bending and stiffness strengths

(Wood Handbook, 1999). Longer and thinner strands are believed to improve properties

because they transfer stress better and have a larger contact area (Wood-Based Panel

Products, 2001).

5. Dry. Strands are sent to either rotary

type or conveyer type dryer where they are

dried from a moisture content of 100 wt % (dry

basis) down to not less than 5 wt % (dry basis),

depending on the target properties and resin

system used (Chase, 1985; Wood-Based Panel

Products, 2001). After drying, the fines are separated to burn for heat and strands are

split into two groups, surface and core strands.

Page 28: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

28

Chapter 2

6. Blend. Resin and wax are sprayed

onto strands in the blender, often with a

spinning disk resin applicator. Different resins

are used on the surface and core layers to help

speed the processing rate and improve the

overall quality of the board. Generally a slower

curing resin, such as a low molecular weight

phenolic or phenolic with no catalyst, is used

on the surface to prevent over curing. A faster curing resin, such as a phenolic containing

a catalyst or isocyanate, is used in the core to speed the pressing process. Wax is also

added at this time, which improves the panel’s resistance to moisture and water absorption

(OSB Manufacturing Process, 1999).

7. Form and Align. The bottom layer

of the mat is formed first using surface strands,

which are aligned in the direction of the board

length. The middle layer or layers are formed

with the core strands next and are aligned

crosswise to the length of the board. The top

layer is formed last with surface strands, and

aligned along the length of the board.

8. Press. Pressing consolidates the mat

and cures the resin to create the board. Boards

are pressed between 177 oC and 204 oC at a

pressure between 345 and 690 kPa for 3 to 5

minutes, depending on the resin system and

board thickness. Most presses are multiple

opening presses, with as many as 16 panel

Page 29: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

29

Oriented Strandboard

openings, which produce boards of a predetermined length and width. There are also a

few continuous presses in operation, which produce a continuous “ribbon” of OSB

(Wood Handbook, 1999).

9. Finish. Boards are cut down to a

final size of 1.2 by 2.4 m immediately after

pressing (Wood-Based Panel Products, 2001).

They are then checked for overall quality, grade

stamped, stacked into bundles and edge coated

(OSB Manufacturing Process, 1999). The

edges are treated to prevent swelling in high

moisture areas. Some boards are cut with

tongue and groove or sanded depending upon their intended use. The stacking process is

actually very important to the final curing. Boards are pressed at very short press times to

reduce operating costs, and stacking and bundling of the still warm boards allows the resin

that binds the OSB panels to fully cure.

2.3 Basic Principles of Wood Composite Pressing

Many factors influence the consolidation of OSB in the press: press temperature,

mat moisture content and its distribution within the mat, wood species, strand geometry,

adhesive type, mat temperature, press time, press closing speed and press pressure (Wood-

Based Panel Products, 2001). The manipulation of these factors can change the final

board properties by affecting the density profile of the board, and production rate by

affecting the heat transfer rate within the mat.

The basic principles that affect OSB during pressing are relevant to similar types of

wood composites, including particle board, fiber board, medium density fiberboard

(MDF), and waferboard. Research has been done on all of these composites and usually

applies universally throughout. The results of this research are compiled in the sections

below to help describe the principles behind wood composite pressing.

Page 30: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

30

Chapter 2

2.3.1 Description of the Press

The figure below shows a basic press that may be used in a laboratory for making

wood composites.

MatStops

Platens

Figure 2-3. A basic laboratory press for making wood composites.

Figure 2-3 shows the hot platens that transfer heat into the mat to cure the

thermosetting resin. The bottom of the press moves to compress the mat to the desired

thickness and in manually controlled presses, “stops” are used to control the final

thickness of the mat. Stops are metal plates used to prevent the press from closing more

than the desired thickness of the board. On more sophisticated press, the thickness may

be controlled automatically by position or total pressure placed on the mat by the press.

Page 31: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

31

Oriented Strandboard

It is important to note that prior to pressing a waferboard or OSB mat, it is usually

less than half of the density of the solid wood flakes due to the number of air voids within

the mat. After pressing, the mat is usually consolidated to nearly twice the density of the

solid wood flakes, which causes high stresses to develop within the wood particles

(Bolton, 1988). If these internal stresses are greater than the resin bonds at press opening,

then the mat will fail or delaminate at press opening. These internal stresses are also what

cause the problem of thickness swelling when OSB and waferboard are exposed to water.

2.3.2 Heat Transfer Modes During Pressing

An understanding of what happens to the mat as it sits in the press is important. In

general, the heat transfer is governed by convection or moisture migration throughout the

mat during pressing. Conduction is more important for heat transfer between the platen

and mat interface (Humphrey, 1989). The importance of convection during pressing is

one of the reasons why strands are not dried lower than 5 wt %. Without enough

moisture present in the mat, there will not be sufficient heat transfer during hot-pressing,

resulting in long press times and over cured face layers.

hot

cool

hot

Steam

Condensate

Steam

Platen

Platen

Figure 2-4. Heat and moisture transfer within mat at the beginning of pressing.

Page 32: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

32

Chapter 2

When the mat is initially placed in the press, the surfaces of the mat, which are in

contact with the hot platens, heat up first while the center of the mat remains cool. The

primary mode of heat transfer from the platen to the surface of the mat is conduction. As

the surfaces of the mat heat up, water within the mat surface is vaporized. A temperature

and vapor pressure gradient quickly forms within the mat, and the steam follows this

gradient to the cooler center where it condenses and releases its latent heat (Bolton,

1988). Therefore, the primary mode of heat transfer within the mat during pressing is

convection. The steam also escapes out the edges of the mat, where there is a

temperature and vapor pressure gradient between the mat and the ambient air (Kelly,

1977).

The condensation of moisture from the face to the core also creates a moisture

gradient throughout the mat, which becomes more prominent as the mat spends time in

the press. This is illustrated in Figure 2-5.

hot

hot

hot

Steam High m.c.

Low m.c.

Low m.c.

Platen

Platen

Figure 2-5. Heat and moisture transfer within the mat at the end of pressing.

Page 33: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

33

Oriented Strandboard

As the center of the mat continues to heat up, moisture there will evaporate and

continue to follow the temperature and vapor pressure gradients that remain at the edges

of the board. Near the end of pressing the entire mat has heated up, and there is a

moisture gradient within the mat due to the steam migration that occurred at the beginning

of pressing. There is high moisture content within the center of the mat where the steam

condensed and low moisture content at the surfaces where the water had evaporated

(Kelly, 1977). It is believed that conduction becomes more important for heat transfer in

areas where the moisture content is very low due to vapor loss from convection (Bolton,

1988).

The interaction between conduction, convection and phase changes affects the

thermal conductivity, density, and permeability of the mat, and continual loss of vapor and

heat from the edges of the mat in the press. These interactions are important to study to

gain an understanding of how heat is transferred within the mat and how this affects resin

curing.

2.3.3 Description of the Core Temperature Profile During Pressing

The figure below shows a typical core temperature profile of waferboard as it is

being pressed. The change in the core temperature of particleboard was described in

detail by Bolton (Bolton, 1989). He divided the profile into periods “A” through “E”,

which are described in the paragraphs below.

Page 34: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

34

Chapter 2

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

0 100 200 300 400 500 600

Total Press time (s)

Tem

pera

ture

(C

)

"A"

"E"

"D"

"C"

"B"

Figure 2-6. Phases of temperature change of mat core during pressing.

Period “A” has little or no temperature rise in the central plane, which is half way

through the thickness of the board. It is theorized that sufficient energy hasn’t entered the

system from the platens to drive the condensation front into the central layer. This is said

to confirm the importance of sustained energy input from the platens to quickly end the

“A” period and shorten the press time (Bolton, 1989).

Period “B” is the rapid rise in temperature in the central plane. The rapid

temperature rise is due to the steep vapor pressure gradient that developed during period

“A”. Researchers noted the importance of vapor pressure in causing this temperature rise

as early as 1959 (Bolton, 1989).

Page 35: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

35

Oriented Strandboard

Period “C” is the decreasing rate of temperature rise in the central plane. This

decreasing rate of change is attributed to a combination of factors including an increase in

vapor lost at the edges due to higher vapor pressure in the core, a decrease in the

temperature gradient, lowering the driving force for vapor migration and therefore

temperature change, a decrease in the amount of heat liberated per unit mass absorbed due

to the rising moisture content of the core, and a decrease in the water evaporated per unit

energy of input from the heated platens due to the falling moisture content of the surfaces.

All of these explanations point towards a decrease in the degree of unsteady state within

the mat (Bolton, 1989).

Period “D” is a plateau in temperature change, with little or no temperature rise in

the central plane. The same factors driving the decrease in period “C” become more and

more important as time progresses until it reaches a point where the rate of vapor gain

from the surface is the same or less than the rate of vapor loss from the edges. The

beginning of this period is linked with the attainment of maximum vapor pressure in the

center of the mat, and as period “D” progresses the internal vapor pressure begins to

decrease (Bolton, 1989).

Period “E” is the gradual temperature rise after the plateau. Some researchers

have attributed this temperature rise to conductive effects believing that convection would

no longer contribute significantly to heat transfer. Convection is believed to become less

important at longer press times but the study of this period may only be academic since

economics of commercial production prevent long press times (Bolton, 1989).

These descriptions and theories about the shape of the internal mat temperature

profile are useful in understanding the mechanism by which heat is transferred through the

mat, although more studies need to be completed to fully understand the relative role of

conduction and convection at the various stages of mat pressing.

Page 36: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

36

Chapter 2

2.3.4 Formation of the Vertical Density Profile

The density of wood composites is not uniform through the thickness of the board.

A typical density profile is shown in the figure below.

Figure 2-7. Typical density change through the thickness of waferboard (Kelly, 1977).

The x-axis of Figure 2-7 is the thickness of the board, and the y-axis is the density

of the board. The typical density profile is U-shaped, with high density areas occurring

near the surfaces and a low density area occurring in the core of the board.

Wang theorized the process that an OSB mat goes through during the pressing

stage and how this relates to the variation in density throughout the finished board (Wang,

Page 37: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

37

Oriented Strandboard

2000). The results of this research demonstrate that there is an unsteady contacting state

between flakes throughout the entire pressing process. In his theory the mat goes through

two periods, consolidation period and adjusting period, and five stages, which are

illustrated in the Figure 2-8.

The first period, called the consolidation period, occurs when the press is closing

to the final pressing thickness. In the first stage of the consolidation period the mat

compresses uniformly. This consolidation is due to between-flake void volume decreases

and the density throughout the thickness of the board is uniform. The second stage of

consolidation is a nonuniform compression stage that occurs right before the press reaches

its final position. The compression rate increases more rapidly in the surface layers due to

changes in the initial temperature and moisture in the mat surface layers. In this stage, the

density at the surface of the mat is the highest (Wang, 2000).

The second period, called the adjusting period, occurs after the press has reached

the stops. This period describes changes that occur within the mat during pressing after it

has reached the target thickness (Wang, 2000).

The first stage within the second period is stage three. Stage three is a

continuation of the consolidation of the surface layers due to their higher temperature and

moisture. The density at the surfaces continues to increase. The press pressure decreases

from the maximum in this stage as the surface layers consolidate and stress relaxation

occurs, causing the core layer to act like a spring (Wang, 2000).

The fourth stage occurs when the core layer consolidates. This occurs when the

core temperature rises and the moisture content becomes higher than the surface layers

because of steam migration. The density of the surface layers actually decreases during

this stage because the surface layers act as a spring (Wang, 2000).

The final stage occurs after the press opens and steam escapes from the mat. The

entire mat acts as a spring. The springback of the mat is not uniform, but greater in the

core due to differences in temperature, moisture, density, and resin bonding (Wang, 2000).

Page 38: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

38

Chapter 2

Figure 2-8. Formation of the vertical density profile of OSB during pressing (Wang,2000). T1, T2, T3, and T4 indicate different thicknesses of the mat during the entire

pressing process, including press closing and press opening.

Page 39: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

39

Oriented Strandboard

2.4 Research Opportunities Using Thermally Conductive

Fillers In OSB

Five areas have been identified as driving forces behind technological

improvements in the OSB industry: improved products, new products, raw material

situations, environmental concerns, and reduced manufacturing costs. This section

focuses on research opportunities that may be addressed with the addition of the

thermally conductive fillers studied. These potential improvements fall into the categories

of improved or new products and reduced manufacturing costs.

Some of OSB weaknesses are related to dimensional stability, durability,

uniformity, smoothness, workability, and aesthetics. Dimensional stability is the ability of

the material to resist changes to its length, width, and thickness when exposed to

moisture, either liquid or atmospheric. When OSB is exposed to water, it absorbs large

amounts causing the thickness swells significantly. This problem is usually addressed by

adding wax to the strands during blending. The wax enhances the strands moisture

resistance and dimensional stability, although too much wax interferes with the bonding

process and makes OSB more flammable (Wood-Based Panel Products, 2001).

Some of the graphite fillers used in this research may also enhance the moisture

resistance of the board, thereby improving dimensional stability, since the fillers are more

hydrophobic than wood. Fire durability also has the potential of being addressed by the

addition of the thermally conductive fillers.

Another consideration is the aesthetic look of OSB. Because OSB is essentially

reconstituted wood, common public perception is that they are getting stuck with scraps

(Fisette, 1997). Some customers, particularly those in Japan, prefer light-colored boards

(Wood-Based Panel Products, 2001). In those cases isocyanate glues are often used. This

adversely affects our research since the carbon fillers darkened the boards making them

look gray and possibly less aesthetically pleasing. This was not the case with the boron

nitride powder, which is a thermally conductive, white powder.

Page 40: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

40

Chapter 2

Cost reduction improvements for commodity OSB are especially important in high

cost components such as wood, adhesives, and energy required for flaking, drying, and

pressing. However, when OSB products expand into higher value markets, profit margins

become more important than simply low operating costs (Wood-Based Panel Products,

2001).

Improvements to adhesives have the potential to either lower adhesive costs or

lower operating costs. Adhesive costs currently represent 14 to 20 % of production costs

(Wood-Based Panel Products, 2001). Commercially, adhesive levels are usually around 2

to 3 % based on the dry wood weight, but higher adhesive levels are used in some

specialty products for increased stability. Resin levels cannot be reduced further with

current technologies (Wood-Based Panel Products, 2001). The use of fillers could

potentially decrease the required resin levels and is discussed in Section 2.5.1.

More reactive and robust adhesives are being studied to decrease operating costs.

The goals of adhesive research are faster curing speeds, better bonding, higher moisture

tolerance, higher wood species tolerance, and lower temperature curing (Wood-Based

Panel Products, 2001). More moisture-tolerant adhesives would reduce drying

requirements and related volatile organic chemical (VOC) emissions of the strands. More

moisture within the panel would also facilitate mat consolidation and increase heat transfer

to the core, which would decrease press time. A lower temperature curing resin would

decrease press operating costs.

The addition of thermally conductive fillers has been theorized to improve the

conductive heat transfer within the board. If heat transfer could be improved this could

lead to shorter press times, improve overall board quality at the same press time, or allow

thicker boards to be made. Decreased press time would speed production and reduce the

energy requirements of the press; improved board quality at the same press time would

decrease quality control costs; and the ability to consistently produce thicker boards

would open up new market opportunities for OSB.

Page 41: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

41

Oriented Strandboard

2.5 Applicable Wood Composites Research

Several current areas of research specifically relevant to this thesis are discussed in

more detail in the sections below. These include the addition of fillers in adhesives, effects

fillers have on resin curing kinetics, the effect of loading of synthetic graphite on internal

bond strength, the unsteady state contacting theory, wood failure and its relationship with

internal bond strength, and modeling of temperature profiles during hot-pressing.

2.5.1 Addition of Fillers In Phenol Formaldehyde Resin Systems

A filler is a non-adhesive substance added to an adhesive to improve its working

properties such as durability, strength or other qualities (“Standard Terminology of

Adhesives”, 2001). Fillers can be used with phenol formaldehyde (PF) resin and work by

adding “body” to the resin or by blocking the pore structure of the wood flake to limit

penetration of the resin into the wood pores (Marra, 1992). They increase the bulk of the

resin and allow for a more uniform spread using a lesser amount of resin. Physical

interactions of the fillers with the resin can be used to control properties of the mixture,

such as flow, penetration, cost, or durability. The addition of fillers generally has adverse

effects at high levels. Common fillers used with phenolic resins include cereal flour, nut

shell flour, wood flour, bark flour, glass flour, cereal hulls, clay, lignin, inactive PF resin

powder, and dried blood (Marra, 1992).

The addition of low-cost fillers in PF resin as a means of reducing resin costs has

been studied by a variety of researchers. What kind of effects the fillers have on the

overall board properties and how those effects can be explained have been studied but not

to a great extent. In one paper, a group of scientists reported the effect of clay, pecan

flour, and wheat flour on PF bonded waferboard by measuring mechanical properties such

as internal bond strength, modulus of elasticity, modulus of rupture, and thickness

swelling. Their work was done in a similar manner as this research project, although,

Page 42: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

42

Chapter 2

higher loadings of filler within the resin was used (25 to 40 wt % filler on a total solids

basis, compared to 20 wt % filler on a total solids basis for this project). Their approach

of interpreting data was also different since they focused on comparing the amount of

resin solids. Boards containing the same amount of resin solids were compared, and it

was determined that some of the fillers did show improved mechanical properties at the

same resin solids content (Gardner, 1990).

Another study was done by looking more at the chemistry between fillers and

resin. In this study several different organic and inorganic fillers were added to a novolac

PF resin, and glued wood joints using the resin were tested. Novolac resins require a

hardener to cure and is described in Section 3.2. Filler loading within the resin was 8 wt.

%, presumably on a wet resin basis. Solids content of the resin was not reported. Image

analysis using SEM micrographs was used to view the fractured surfaces of the wood

joints. The researchers found that the effects of the filler appeared to relate to the physical

aspects of adhesive viscosity, penetration into the wood, concentration of the filler in the

bondline, shape of the particles, and the bond between adhesive and filler particle

(Ebewele, 1986).

2.5.2 Effect of Fillers On Curing Kinetics of Phenol Formaldehyde

Resin Systems

The curing kinetics of PF resin and PF resin containing ThermocarbTM Specialty

Graphite, a high purity, synthetic graphite manufactured by Conoco, Inc., were measured

on a differential scanning calorimeter (DSC) using a Mettler Toledo STAR System at a

heating rate of 10 oC/min (Matuana, 2001). A filler loading of 1 g filler/4 g resin solids

was used. Table 2-1 shows the results from this research. Ea is the activation energy of

the reaction, ∆H is the heat of reaction, Ln(ko) is the natural log of the reaction rate

constant, “n-th order” is the order of the reaction, and “Peak Temp” is the maximum

reaction temperature.

Page 43: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

43

Oriented Strandboard

Table 2-1. Differential scanning calorimeter results determining the curing kineticparameters of PF resin and PF resin containing ThermocarbTM Specialty Graphite

(Matuana, 2001).

Curing Kinetic Parameters

SamplesEa

(kJ/mol)∆H

(J/g)Ln(k 0) n-th order Peak Temp.

(oC)

PF 128.2 ± 0.9 271.7 31.9 ± 0.3 1.95 152.5PF + TC 127.4 ± 0.7 276.5 31.7 ± 0.2 2.05 151.3

The results of the DSC show that the ThermocarbTM Specialty Graphite did not

affect the curing kinetics of the resin, since the curing kinetic parameters are the same for

both PF and PF containing graphite. This implies that the carbon acts as neither a catalyst

nor an inhibitor to the curing reaction of PF resin.

These results have been duplicated for other fillers, including wheat flour, clay, and

pecan shell flour, in PF resin. Filler loading ranged from 25 to 40 wt % on a resin solids

basis. Through the use of dynamic mechanical thermal analysis and DSC, the curing

mechanism of the resin was determined to have been unaffected by the addition of these

fillers or extenders (Waage, 1991).

Similar DSC results were also obtained for PF resin containing various organic and

inorganic fillers: walnut shell flour, douglas fir bark, mica, clay, and silica, in the same

study of wood glue joints discussed in Section 2.5.1. Fillers were added at 8 wt. %

loading to novolac PF resin. This study also showed that the addition of fillers did not

affect the curing rate of the resin (Ebewele, 1986).

Page 44: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

44

Chapter 2

2.5.3 Effect of ThermocarbTM Specialty Graphite Loading In

Waferboard On Internal Bond Strength

Preliminary work incorporating synthetic graphite in OSB was done at MTU prior

to the start of the research presented in this thesis. Thermocarb™ Specialty Graphite was

added to 11-mm thick OSB at different levels and pressed for 2 minutes after the press

reached the stops (Matuana, 2001). The internal bond (IB) strength was measured and

the average and standard deviation is shown in Table 2-2. “Loading” is the weight percent

of Thermocarb™ Specialty Graphite, on a dry strand basis and “Count” is the number of

IB samples tested.

Table 2-2. Summary of internal bond (IB) data from 11-mm OSB made with varyinglevels of TC filler and pressed for 2 minutes (Matuana, 2001).

Loading(wt. %)

Average(kPa)

St. Dev.(kPa) Count

0 117 34 80.5 172 76 81 159 110 82 165 159 73 221 69 8

The results in Table 2-2 show high variability. The effect of the fillers on internal

bond strength is evident at low loadings around 0.5 and 1 wt %. For this current project,

1 wt % loading level on an oven dried wood weight basis (1 g filler/100 g dry flakes) was

chosen for all thermally conductive fillers. Enough filler was needed to demonstrate the

effects of the filler, but excessively high filler loadings would likely be uneconomical and

could have potentially adverse affects on strength properties.

Page 45: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

45

Oriented Strandboard

2.5.4 Unsteady Contacting State Theory

The unsteady contacting state between flakes was described in Section 2.3.4 in the

theory of the formation of the vertical density profile. This unsteady state is due to heat

and moisture gradients within the board during pressing. This leads to later bond

development and resin cure in the core compared to the surface layers. The unsteady

contacting state in stage III of Wang’s theory mainly affects the bonds developed in the

surface layers, while in stage IV the bonds in the core layers are mostly affected (Wang,

2000).

Wang goes on to use his theory to describe common occurrences in the

manufacturing process. In general, strength properties of thinner panels are better than

thicker panels with the same average density. He states that this phenomena is best

explained by the more severe unsteady phase in the thick mat, as a consequence of large

temperature and moisture gradients during pressing, and poorer quality of bond formation.

Wang supported his theory by citing research where two identical panels manufactured

using different pressing schedules (different rates of press closing using a step-closing

procedure) exhibited the same core density (usually the weak point), but the panel that

was subjected to the more severe unsteady phase (due to a faster rate of press closing)

exhibited significantly lower internal bonding strength (Wang, 2000).

This may be important for this research if a way can be determined to reduce the

time of the unsteady state heat transfer. Reducing the unsteady state heat transfer could

provide better bond formation in thicker boards.

2.5.5 Wood Failure As Indication of Internal Bond Strength

Work was done by Ellis to correlate the amount of wood failure on the fracture

surface of an IB test specimen to the measured IB strength (Ellis, 1995). Wood failure

occurs when the wood-glue bond and glueline are stronger than the wood being bonded

Page 46: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

46

Chapter 2

together, resulting in failure occurring through the wood substrate. Measurement of wood

failure is commonly done on plywood specimens either by estimation by experienced

individuals or now through image analysis techniques. A digital picture of the fracture

surface is taken and analyzed using threshold values to distinguish between grey shades

that correspond to light-colored wood and dark-colored glue. A binary black and white

image results and the percentages of white (wood) and black (glue) values are determined

(Ellis, 1995).

Ellis used similar image analysis techniques to try to correlate IB strength with the

amount of wood failure as determined through image analysis for waferboard specimens.

The main problem with this type of analysis on waferboard is that there is not always a

continuous glueline within waferboard, due to the nature of the process by which it is

made. The resin is sprayed on the waferboard in discrete droplets, and image analysis can

only distinguish between resin and wood. This sort of image analysis is prone to a bias

toward wood failure, where results indicating wood failure could be due to a lack of

continuous resin application to the wood flake (Ellis, 1995).

Ellis was able to get satisfactory results using a resin loading level of not less than

6 wt % of resin solids based on the oven dried wood weight. Resin loading levels less

than this did not result in image-able differences between the flakes and resin. He did find

at the 6 wt % resin loading that higher wood failure values were associated with greater

internal bond strengths, and that this correlation was greater with powder PF resin than

with liquid PF resin (Ellis, 1995). This technique may be useful for future work in this

research as a way to determine the quality of the bonds containing specific fillers,

although, higher resin loadings within the waferboard, such as 6 wt % resin solids on an

oven dried wood weight basis, would be required.

Page 47: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

47

Oriented Strandboard

2.5.6 Modeling Hot-Pressing Temperature Gradients

Modeling work has been done to predict the vertical density profiles, and usually

included in this work is a model to predict the temperature change within the mat during

pressing. A review of the assumptions and drawbacks of models developed for heat

transfer within a mat during hot-pressing was done by Bolton and Humphrey in 1988 prior

to presenting their own model (Bolton, 1988). Below is a brief discussion of three

different models.

A model for the temperature profile, based on heat transfer theory, was used by

Suo in developing his model for vertical density profiles (Suo, 1994). The analytical result

is based on the following differential equation.

∂∂

∂∂=

∂∂

x

TD

xt

Th (2-1)

A solution for the differential equation was given by the infinite series shown

below.

+−++

++= ∑∞

=02

22

101

)12(exp

)12(sin

)12(

14)(

n

h

b

tDn

b

xn

nTTTT

πππ (2-2)

Where,

T1 = platen temperature (oC)

T0 = initial mat temperature before pressing (oC)

x = distance from closest platen (cm)

b = mat thickness during pressing (cm)

Dh = thermal diffusivity (cm2/s)

t = pressing time (s)

The thermal diffusivity for the transverse transport of heat in wood was estimated

by an empirical equation that was a function of the specific gravity and moisture content

of the wood, the normal density of water, and temperature. Suo also determined that the

Page 48: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

48

Chapter 2

sum of the first two terms in the infinite series was accurate enough for approximation

(Suo, 1994).

A modified differential equation was used by Harless to describe the temperature

profile during hot-pressing for his model of the vertical density profile (Harless, 1987).

2

2

x

TK

x

T

x

K

t

TDcp ∂

∂+∂∂

∂∂=

∂∂

(2-3)

Where,

t = time (s)

T = temperature (K)

x = distance from the closest platen (m)

K = thermal conductivity (W/mK)

D = density (kg/m3)

cp = specific heat (J/kgK)

Finite difference equations were used to solve the partial derivatives. An empirical

relationship for the thermal conductivity of particleboard as function of temperature and

density was used, and specific heat of the wood constituent was calculated as a function of

temperature.

Since the differential equation did not take into account the phase change of water

at its boiling point, Harless used the differential equation up to a temperature of 100 oC

(the boiling point of water) and additional energy was applied to the evaporation of

moisture within the mat until all of the water was evaporated. Once all of the moisture

was evaporated, the layer was once again allowed to change according to the differential

equation shown above (Harless, 1987).

A much more complete simulation of heat transfer was developed by Humphrey

and Bolton and was discussed in a series of papers published in Holzfortschung in 1989.

Their model simulated conduction, the phase change of absorbed moisture to vapor, and

convection. This model was also based on a modified finite difference approach, in which

Page 49: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

49

Oriented Strandboard

special provisions were made for boundary conditions and phase changes. It was a three

dimensional model that ran in FORTRAN and simultaneously predicted heat and moisture

transfer within the mat during hot-pressing (Humphrey, 1989).

Page 50: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

50

Chapter 3

Chapter 3. Experimental Materials

This chapter describes the materials used to manufacture waferboard for this

project. The materials covered are strands, resin, and thermally conductive fillers.

3.1 Strands

Two different types of strands were used in this research: commercial OSB

strands donated by Louisiana Pacific Corporation, Sagola, Michigan OSB mill, and MTU

made Aspen strands.

The Louisiana Pacific (LP) strands were used in Experiment 1 and temperature

profile measurements. The strands were approximately 25 mm wide by 100 mm long, and

had a dried thickness of about 0.69 mm. The strand content was approximately 89%

Aspen, 4% Basswood, 4% Birch, and 3% Soft Maple. Two 360 kg (800 lb) loads of

strands were received from LP on May 23rd and September 8th of 2000. They were

collected from the mill after sorting and drying to about 5% moisture content but before

resin application.

For the remaining waferboard experiments (Experiments 2 and 3), 100% Aspen

flakes made at MTU were used. Strands were made from green Aspen logs donated by

Strandwood Molding, Inc., Dollar Bay, Michigan. Strands were made on a 1.5-m (5 ft)

diameter disk flaker. The flaker has eight 508 mm (20 inch) knives and a 40 horsepower

electric motor. It turns at about 325 rpm. The strands were about 25 mm wide by 50 mm

long and 0.76 mm thick. Strands were made on two separate occasions: 180 kg (400 lb)

on April 17th and 360 kg (800 lb) on June 25th of 2001.

Page 51: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

51

Experimental Materials

Figure 3-1. MTU 1.5-meter diameter disk flaker used to make strands for Experiments 2and 3.

All LP and MTU strands were further prepared at MTU by drying down to 2 wt %

(dry basis) moisture content in a 450 kg capacity, in-house fabricated, electrically heated

forced air batch dryer. Dried flakes were unloaded from the dryer by a built-in conveyor

belt which dropped them onto a Black Clawson model 580 rotary shaker screen flake

classifying system located directly under the dryer. The classifying system has a 0.6 m

wide by 2.4 m long shaker screen that shakes to remove particles smaller than the screen

size. This leaves only the larger flakes to use in the waferboard. For this project a 6.4-

mm screen was used, which removed wood particles smaller than 6.4 mm in size.

After classifying, the strands were stored in sealed 208-L (55-gal) plastic drums to

help maintain the moisture content. By the time the strands were used they were no more

than 2.5 wt % moisture.

Page 52: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

52

Chapter 3

A ro-tap sieve analysis using a Ro-tap Testing Sieve Shaker manufactured by W.W.

Tyler, Inc., was performed on approximately 200 g samples of dried, screened strands

from each batch. Four 203-mm (8 in) diameter screens were used with 25.4-mm, 19.1-

mm, 12.7-mm, and 6.4-mm opening sizes. Each sample was ro-tapped in 50 g increments

for one hour. The results of the ro-tap analysis are shown in the Table 3-1 and Figure 3-2.

Raw data for the ro-tap analysis is in Appendix A.

Table 3-1. Results of ro-tap sieve analysis on strands used for Experiments 1, 2, and 3.

LP5-23-2000

LP9-8-2000

MTU4-17-2001

MTU6-25-2001

Total Mass (g) 196.30 198.42 217.07 218.16+25.4mm (wt %) 52 25 1 3-25.4mm/+19.1mm (wt %) 7 15 5 8-19.1mm/+12.7mm (wt %) 10 12 14 23-12.7mm/+6.4mm (wt %) 17 28 41 33-6.4 mm (wt %) 14 20 39 33Total (wt %) 100 100 100 100

The ro-tap analysis showed that the LP strands had a much larger weight fraction

of flakes larger than 25.4 mm, where as most of the MTU strands were smaller than 12.7

mm. OSB made with larger strands, such as the commercial LP strands, has better

bending properties, but smaller strands may produce more consistent boards with the small

MTU press and give more consistent test results with the 51 x 51 mm internal bond test

specimens. More edge effects could be caused during mat forming by larger strands since

they extend a significant way into the mat from the edge (almost a quarter of the way).

This means that a larger edge should be trimmed from the pressed board to eliminate these

effects.

Page 53: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

53

Experimental Materials

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

LP 5-23-2000 LP 9-8-2000 MTU 4-17-2001 MTU 6-25-2001

Siz

e D

istr

ibut

ion

(wt.

%)

+25.4mm-25.4mm/+19.1mm-19.1mm/+12.7mm-12.7mm/+6.4-mm-6.4mm

Figure 3-2. Size distribution from ro-tap analysis of strands used for Experiments 1, 2,and 3.

Even though all of the strands were classified with a 6.4 mm screen prior to the ro-

tap analysis, a significant amount of fines showed up in the results. Some degradation of

the strands is expected as they are handled, and consequently broken down into small

pieces. The rate at which the strands were classified may also have contributed to the

large amount of fines. If too many strands are brought onto the classifier at once then the

equipment becomes overloaded and not all the fines are removed. The LP strands were

collected at the plant after the fines were removed. Commercial equipment is probably a

lot more robust at removing the fines from the strands than the simple shaker classifying

system at MTU.

Page 54: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

54

Chapter 3

3.2 Phenol Formaldehyde Resin

There are many different resins used in the wood industry to form wood

composites. Almost all of these resins are synthetic polymer resins based on the

condensation reaction of formaldehyde with compounds derived from either benzene or

ammonia (Koch, 1987). The resin used for this project was a phenol formaldehyde (PF)

resin. PF resin forms in two stages: an addition stage and a condensation stage. These

chemical reactions are shown in Figure 3-3.

The first stage is the addition of phenol and formaldehyde to form

monomethylolphenol. The second stage is the condensation reaction between two

methylol molecules. The condensation reaction occurs when a hydroxyl group reacts with

a hydrogen atom on a phenol molecule (shown in the dashed box in the figure above).

This results in a water molecule and what is called a methylene bridge between two phenol

groups. The condensation reaction continues with the addition of heat, which results in

cross-linking between phenol groups and larger and larger molecules (Marra, 1992).

There are two different types of PF resin that are manufactured, and they depend

upon the molar ratio of phenol to formaldehyde in the resin. If there is more phenol than

formaldehyde, it is called a novolac. Novolacs are unable to polymerize without the

addition of more formaldehyde, due to the small amount of methylol groups present. This

results in an indefinitely long shelf life but requires a hardener (formaldehyde) to cure.

The second type of resin is called a resole, which is what is commonly used in the

wood industry. A resole has less phenol than formaldehyde, and therefore has many

methylol groups available for polymerization under the right set of circumstances (usually

the application of heat). The disadvantage to resoles is that they continue to harden in

storage, resulting in a limited shelf life (Marra, 1992). For our project we used a liquid PF

resole resin.

Page 55: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

55

Experimental Materials

Figure 3-3. Chemical reactions of phenol formaldehyde (PF) resin (Marra, 1992).

Page 56: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

56

Chapter 3

The resole resin is generally manufactured in a jacketed, stainless steel batch

reactor. Molten phenol, formaldehyde, water, methanol, and an alkaline catalyst, such as

sodium hydroxide, are placed in the reactor and heated to 80 to 100 oC . Reaction

temperatures are kept within this range by either applying vacuum or using cooling water

in the reactor jacket. Reaction times vary from 1 to 8 hours, according to target

properties of the final resin, which are tailored to the intended use of the resin (Pizzi,

1994). In commercial production the reaction is stopped at an early or intermediate stage,

when the resin is still soluble in water (Koch, 1987). These water soluble resins are

finished at as low a temperature as possible, usually around 40 to 60 oC (Pizzi, 1994)..

The resin can be manipulated to meet customer requirements. For OSB there are

generally two types of PF resin, one that is used for the face layers and one that is used for

the core layers. The face layer resins are typically slower curing, so that they do not over

cure by the time the core layers set. Since the slow part in the hot-pressing process is

waiting for the center of the mat to heat up and cure, faster curing resins are usually used

in the core layers. Different resins that inherently cure faster, such as isocyanates, are

sometimes used, but PF resins specifically formulated for use in core layers have also been

developed. To speed the cure rate of PF resin, the resin is sometimes manufactured to a

higher molecular weight, meaning the reaction process is more advanced, or a catalyst is

added to speed the polymerization reaction.

The resin used for this project was Cascophen® OS-707.

Cascophen® OS-707

Cascophen® OS-707 is a liquid phenol formaldehyde resole resin manufactured by

Borden Chemical, Inc. The resin is a reddish-brown liquid, specially formulated for use in

the surface layer of OSB (“Cascophen OS-707 Data Sheet”, 2000). It is described in the

data sheet from the manufacturer as “a moderate curing resin that has excellent durability

Page 57: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

57

Experimental Materials

with both hardwood and softwood species.” A list of its physical properties at the time of

manufacture is shown below.

Table 3-2. Physical properties at the time of manufacture of Cascophen® OS-707 phenolformaldehyde resin (“Cascophen OS-707 Data Sheet”, 2000).

Property ValueSolids (wt %) 57 ± 1Brookfield RVF Viscosity (cP) 150 ± 50Specific Gravity 1.233 ± 0.003Alkalinity (%) 4.0 ± 0.3pH 10.5 ± 0.5

A slower curing surface layer resin was chosen in hopes that it would better

illustrate the effects the thermally conductive fillers have on the curing process of

waferboard.

3.3 Thermally Conductive Fillers

Five thermally conductive fillers were used during waferboard manufacturing.

These fillers are listed below.

1. Thermocarb™ Specialty Graphite TC-300

2. Coarse Thermocarb™ Specialty Graphite

3. Lonza KS-75-250 Manufactured Graphite

4. Signature® Crystalline Flake Graphite 2100

5. Boron Nitride Powder HCP

These fillers are classified and discussed in three separate categories: synthetic

graphite, natural graphite and boron nitride. A comparison of the physical properties of

the fillers is presented at the end of this section.

Page 58: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

58

Chapter 3

3.3.1 Synthetic Graphite

In general, graphite is known an excellent lubricant, which can withstand high

temperatures and corrosive environments and is also a good conductor of heat and

electricity (“Carbonsource”, 2001). Graphite is used for many things including:

lubricants, molded shapes, pencils, batteries, refractories, plastic and rubber fillers,

conductive coatings, heat dissipation applications, acid tank liners, and the manufacture of

artificial diamonds used for cutting, grinding, and drilling. Graphite is both a naturally

occurring mineral and a man-made or synthetic material.

Synthetic graphite is manufactured from by-product carbon products, which are

graphitized at high temperatures, using electrical energy. After initial preparation of the

raw material, it is sent to a graphitization furnace where it reaches temperatures of up to

3000 oC. For graphite powder, like those used in this project, the material is sometimes

crushed before loading into the furnace. When current is passed over the particles in the

furnace, small arcs are formed between adjacent particles and the material becomes

incandescent throughout the entire graphitization process (Mantell, 1968).

During graphitization, various changes occur to the material at different

temperatures within the furnace. Metallic impurities begin to volatilize at 2000 oC. The

structural change from amorphous carbon to graphitic carbon takes place between 2200

and 2600 oC. Electrical and thermal conductivity properties increase with temperatures up

to 3000 oC. The crystalline growth and therefore final properties of the synthetic graphite

are dependent upon the carbon structure of the raw material prior to being graphitized

(Mantell, 1968). Synthetic graphite is often purer but more abrasive than natural graphite

(“Cummings Moore Graphite”, 2001).

Three different synthetic graphites were used in this research: ThermocarbTM

Specialty Graphite TC-300, coarse ThermocarbTM Specialty Graphite, and Lonza KS-75-

250 Manufactured Graphite.

Page 59: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

59

Experimental Materials

Thermocarb™ Specialty Graphite TC-300

Thermocarb™ Specialty Graphite is a high purity (99.9 % carbon) synthetic

graphite manufactured by Conoco, Inc. It is known for its excellent electrical and thermal

conducting properties.

Coarse Thermocarb™ Specialty Graphite

Coarse Thermocarb™ Specialty Graphite is another synthetic graphite

manufactured by Conoco, Inc. This graphite is identical to Thermocarb™ Specialty

Graphite except that it has been through an additional processing step to remove particles

smaller than 70 µm.

Lonza KS-75-250 Manufactured Graphite

Lonza KS-75-250 Manufactured Graphite is a synthetic graphite manufactured by

Timcal. It has many of the same properties as the other two synthetic graphites used.

3.3.2 Natural Graphite

Natural graphite is a naturally occurring mineral that is extracted from the ground.

There are three types of natural graphite used for commercial applications: amorphous,

crystalline vein, and flake graphite.

Amorphous graphite is the least “graphitic” of the three types. This graphite was

formed from anthracite coal, which is a hard, slow-burning coal. The noncrystalline coal

is transformed into the crystalline graphite when layers of molten rock are thrust into

preexisting coal beds. This situation provides the energy needed for the solid-to-solid

state transformation. These types of deposits are found mainly in Mexico and China, and

range in purity from 75 to 90 %. Amorphous graphite is removed from the ground using

traditional coal mining techniques and looks similar to coal, except that it is electrically

conductive, more metallic gray in color, and more dense (Mineralogy of Natural Graphite,

2001).

Page 60: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

60

Chapter 3

Crystalline vein graphite was believed to have been formed between 1.2 billion and

600 million years ago. There is some question into how it was actually formed, but it is

theorized that the graphite was precipitated out of a gas or liquid phase solution into

fissures within the ground. Because of the deposition process, these deposits are typically

above 90% purity with some as pure as 99.5 %. These types of deposits are needlelike.

Sri Lanka is the only area known to produce commercially viable quantities. This graphite

is also mined from the ground using traditional mining techniques (“Mineralogy of Natural

Graphite”, 2001).

Flake graphite, which has a platelet geometry, is the most common type of natural

graphite. Flake graphite is the most anisotropic of the three types, which makes it an

excellent lubricant and also gives it a high thermal conductivity (“Superior Graphite Co.”,

2001). It is theorized that flake graphite was formed from organic carbon deposits left

behind from algae and other simple life forms found in archaic deep-sea environments.

These deposits are believed to be older than multicellular life (“Mineralogy of Natural

Graphite”, 2001).

Most flake graphite is mined outside of the U.S. Large reserves of flake graphite

have been found in China, Canada, Brazil, Madagascar, Mozambique, Zimbabwe, and

Russia. The carbon content of the raw ore is anywhere between 5 and 40 % graphite, and

must be purified before use in most industrial applications (“Mineralogy of Natural

Graphite”, 2001). The purpose of purification is to separate the graphite from the gangue,

the stony minerals occurring with the graphite in the deposit. Purity levels from 80 to 96

% carbon can be obtained using a process called froth flotation (“Cummings Moore

Graphite”, 2001). A schematic of this technique is shown in Figure 3-4.

Page 61: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

61

Experimental Materials

Figure 3-4. Schematic of froth floatation separation process (Wills, 1985).

Froth flotation is a method of separation that utilizes the different surface

properties of minerals. Crushed ore is placed in a flotation cell, where air bubbles are

passed through the agitated solution. Different reagents are used to make the graphite

aerophilic while leaving the gangue aerophobic. This results in the graphite attaching itself

to the rising air bubbles and concentrating at the top of the surface, called the froth. The

gangue is left in the pulp (raw ore-solution mixture) (Wills, 1985). Higher purity levels

greater than 96% can be obtained in flake graphite by additional chemical processing

(“Cummings Moore Graphite”, 2001).

One natural graphite, Signature(R) Crystalline Flake Graphite 2100, was used in this

project for waferboard manufacturing.

Signature® Crystalline Flake Graphite 2100

Signature® Crystalline Flake Graphite 2100 is a natural graphite that is distributed

by Superior Graphite Co. It is a flake graphite with 95 wt % carbon content. This

graphite is not as pure as the synthetic graphite, but is also less expensive.

Page 62: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

62

Chapter 3

3.3.3 Boron Nitride

Boron nitride is a non-toxic, environmentally safe man made material

(“Carborundum”, 2001). W.H. Balmain first synthesized boron nitride in 1842, but it was

not until the 1960’s that more stable forms of boron nitride were created. Now with the

further improvement of technology, boron nitride has become more economical and used

in various applications. There are two forms of boron nitride: cubic boron nitride, (c)BN;

and hexagonal boron nitride, (h)BN. A comparison of properties between the two types is

shown below.

Table 3-3. Comparison of properties between hexagonal boron nitride and cubic boronnitride (Lelonis, 1994).

(h)BN (c)BNSoft HardLubricating AbrasiveThermally conductive Thermally conductiveHigh temperature resistant Oxidation resistantInert Non-reactive with ferrous alloys

From the comparison of properties shown above, boron nitride is very similar to

carbon. The hexagonal form is comparable to graphite (soft and slippery) where as the

cubic form is comparable to diamond (hard and abrasive). In fact, diamond is the only

substance harder than (c)BN. This project used powdered (h)BN.

The largest differences between (h)BN and graphite are color and electrical

properties. Graphite is black and electrically conductive while (h)BN is white and

electrically insulating. (H)BN has even been given the name “white graphite” because of

the many similarities (Lelonis, 1994). There are a wide variety of applications for (h)BN,

many of which are similar to graphite and include lubricants, mold release, molded shapes,

refractories, fillers for plastics and other composite materials, heat sinks, and electrical

insulators (“Advanced Ceramic Powders and Shapes”, 1999).

Page 63: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

63

Experimental Materials

Boron nitride powder is generally made industrially from one of three different

reactions (Schwetz, 1985).

1. OHBNNHOB Co

2900

332 322 + →+

This is the reaction of boric oxide with ammonia, and requires a second heat

treatment at a temperatures > 1500 oC under Nitrogen, for purification and

stabilization.

2. OHCOBNNHCOOB Co

221000

2232 22)( ++ →+ >

This is the reaction of boric oxide with an organic nitrogen compounds, for

example urea or melamine

3. CaOBNNOBCaB Co

320103 15002326 + →++ >

This is the nitridation of calcium hexaboride in the presence of boric oxide.

Some other facts about boron nitride that may be of interest in this project are:

♦ Boron nitride is known to provide superior thermal enhancement even

when compared to materials with higher inherent thermal conductivity.

This is illustrated in Figure 3-5.

Figure 3-5. Thermal conductivity of epoxy containing various thermally conductive fillers(“Advanced Ceramic Powders and Shapes”, 1999).

Page 64: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

64

Chapter 3

♦ Boron nitride has been shown to have better lubricating properties

(lower coefficient of friction) and to retain its lubricating properties at

higher temperature than graphite (Lelonis, 2001).

♦ Boron nitride is also known to be resistant to moisture and has a

lubricity that provides good flow properties at high loadings

(“PolarTherm”, 1999).

Hexagonal boron nitride powder, Boron Nitride Powder HCP, was one filler used

for this project.

Boron Nitride Powder HCP

Boron nitride was the thermally conductive non-graphite material used in this

project. Boron Nitride powder HCP is from Advanced Ceramics Corporation. It is a

hexagonal boron nitride powder that is 99 wt % pure and has an average particle size of

approximately 10 µm.

3.3.4 Comparison of Filler Properties

The following section is a comparison of physical properties of the five different

fillers used in this project. This section is organized according to the following property

types: particle size, aspect ratio, purity, physical properties, and SEM photographs.

There are many tables used to summarize the properties and each filler type is listed across

the top of the table using the following abbreviations.

TC Thermocarb™ Specialty Graphite

CTC Coarse Thermocarb™ Specialty Graphite

L Lonza Manufactured Graphite

S Signature® Crystalline Flake Graphite

BN Boron Nitride Powder HCP

Page 65: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

65

Experimental Materials

In addition to summarizing the physical properties, details of testing methods and

conclusions from the comparison are added where appropriate.

Particle Size

Conoco, Inc. performed particle sizing in August 2000 using the Malvern 2600

series unit, using the laser diffraction method. Technicians first broke up agglomerated

particles with an ultrasonic bath. A 63 mm lens was used with the BN and a 300 mm lens

was used with the others. All tests were done with in deionized water, usually with a

surfactant, and agitated using a magnetic stirrer (Personal Communication, 10-12-2001).

Table 3-4 contains a summary, including the mean, median, 10th percentile, and 90th

percentile, of the particle size results for all five fillers. All values in Table 3-4 are given in

µm (Personal Communication, 8-23-2000).

Table 3-4. Summary of particle size results for the thermally conductive fillers in µm.

TC CTC L S BN

Mean 95.80 278.58 156.69 137.49 11.44

Median 68.88 258.58 156.73 117.77 10.19

10th Percentile 21.35 123.52 31.12 27.71 3.60

90th Percentile 199.83 468.08 272.1 267.79 20.52

Figures 3-6 through 3-10 shows the particle size distribution from the Malvern

output for the five fillers. It is important to notice when looking at the particle size

distributions that the scale along the x-axis (particle size) is the same for all except with

BN. The BN powder is much smaller than the other fillers (compare the mean particle

sizes in Table 3-4) and contains no particles larger than 60 µm. The single line across

these graphs represents the cumulative particle size distribution.

Page 66: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

66

Chapter 3

Figure 3-6. Thermocarb™ Specialty Graphite particle size distribution (PersonalCommunication, 8-23-2000).

Figure 3-7. Particle size distribution for Coarse Thermocarb™ Specialty Graphite(Personal Communication, 8-23-2000).

Page 67: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

67

Experimental Materials

Figure 3-8. Particle size distribution of Lonza Manufactured Graphite (PersonalCommunication, 8-23-2000).

Figure 3-9. Particle size distribution of Signature® Crystalline Flake Graphite (PersonalCommunication, 8-23-2000).

Page 68: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

68

Chapter 3

Figure 3-10. Particle size distribution for Boron Nitride Powder (PersonalCommunication, 8-23-2000).

Qualitatively, the particle size distributions show that Thermocarb™ Specialty

Graphite has a fairly even size distribution, whereas the coarse Thermocarb™ Specialty

Graphite and Lonza Manufactured Graphite both have more narrow size distributions

towards the larger sizes. The biggest difference between the latter two fillers, is the tail of

smaller particle sizes of the Lonza Manufactured Graphite.

The differences in size between the two Thermocarb™ Specialty Graphites is

expected since both are the same material, with the except that course one has been

screened to remove particles smaller than 70 µm. The Signature® Crystalline Flake

Graphite has a distribution much like the Thermocarb™ Specialty Graphite, but with more

of a tendency towards the larger particle sizes. Boron Nitride Powder is much smaller in

size than any of the fillers studied, with nothing over 60 µm in size.

Aspect Ratio

Conoco, Inc. tested aspect ratios in October 2000, by examining the fillers under a

stereomicroscope or polarized light microscope and measuring the aspect ratios using

Image Pro Software. Samples were prepared by dispersing the fillers on a slide coated

Page 69: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

69

Experimental Materials

with optical adhesive and cured with ultraviolet light (Personal Communication, 10-11-

2000).

Table 3-4 contains summary information of the aspect ratio results, including the

mean, median, standard deviation, and number of measurements made in the test (Personal

Communication, 10-10-2000). Results for Boron Nitride were not measured because the

sample particles were too small for the test method (Personal Communication, 10-11-

2000). The value for Boron Nitride listed in the table is from vendor supplied information

(Personal Communication, 12-5-2001).

Table 3-4. Aspect ratio for thermally conductive fillers.

TC CTC L S BN

Mean 2.04 2.17 1.67 1.61 1 – 1.5

Median 1.73 1.83 1.50 1.46 1 – 1.5

Standard Deviation 1.06 1.13 0.68 0.64 --

Count 853 457 501 698 --

Aspect ratio is a measure of shape, and is the length of the particle, divided by the

width. A measurement of 1 would mean that the length equals width, or the particle is

spherical. Both regular and coarse Thermocarb™ Specialty Graphite had about the same

mean aspect ratio of about 2, where as the other two carbons had slightly smaller mean

aspect ratios of approximately 1.6.

Purity

Tables 3-5 and 3-6 contain purity information for all fillers. Conoco, Inc. did much

of the testing and the rest of the information was obtained from vendor specification

sheets on the materials (Personal Communications, 6-5-2001; 9-25-2001, 10-15-2001;

“Lonza Graphite..”, 1993; “Thermocarb..”, 2001; “Signature Product Data Sheet: Grade

2101”, 1997; “Signature Product Data Sheet: Grade 2100”, 1997; “Boron Nitride

Powder Grade HCP”, 2001; “PolarTherm”, 1999)

Page 70: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

70

Chapter 3

Tables 3-5 and 3-6 show that the impurities are low for all synthetic materials (TC,

CTC, L, and BN). The ash is much higher on the natural graphite (S), the total carbon

content is lower, and the trace metals content is much higher, indicating lower purity than

the synthetic materials.

Table 3-5. Major constituents of the thermally conductive fillers in wt %

TC CTC L S BN

Carbon 99.9 99.9 99.9 95 0.03

Ash 0.04 0.04 0.04 4.1 --

Moisture 0.04 0.04 < 0.01 0.2 0.15

Sulfur 0.02 0.02 0.04 0.02 < 20 ppm

Boron Nitride 0 0 0 0 99

Table 3-6. Trace metals (ppm) in the thermally conductive fillers

TC CTC L S BN

Aluminum 60 60 < 15 2900 < 100

Calcium 21 21 13 420 < 10

Iron 65 65 6 8900 < 100

Manganese < 5 < 5 < 5 60 < 10

Nickel < 5 < 5 < 5 40 < 10

Silicon 27 27 140 8400 < 100

Sodium 11 11 < 5 90 < 20

Titanium 6 6 5 80 < 100

Vanadium < 5 < 5 25 75 < 10

Zinc < 5 < 5 < 5 95 < 10

Copper < 5 < 5 < 5 40 < 100

Magnesium < 5 < 5 < 5 420 < 100

Page 71: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

71

Experimental Materials

Physical Properties and Pricing Information

Tables 3-7 and 3-8 shows various physical properties and typical prices of the

fillers (Personal Communications, 6-5-2001; 9-25-2001, 10-15-2001; “Lonza

Graphite..”, 1993; “Thermocarb..”, 2001; “Signature Product Data Sheet: Grade 2101”,

1997; “Signature Product Data Sheet: Grade 2100”, 1997; “Boron Nitride Powder

Grade HCP”, 2001; “PolarTherm”, 1999) Starred (*) numbers indicate estimated values.

Table 3-7. Miscellaneous physical properties of the thermally conductive fillers

TC CTC L S BN

Theoretical Density (g/cc) 2.24 2.24 2.24* 2.23* 2.25

Bulk Density (g/cc) 0.67 0.78 0.71 0.69 --

Vibrated Bulk Density (g/cc) 0.68 0.81 0.78 0.72 0.4

Thermal Conductivity (W/mK) 500* 500* 500-* 500+* 300-*

Specific Heat @ 25 oC (J/kg/K) 721* 721* 721* 721* 794

BET Surface Area using N2 (m2/g) 1.4 1.3 2.2 3.2 13

All materials have very similar theoretical densities, but there are variations in the

bulk density because the materials have different particle sizes. The axial thermal

conductivity of all the fillers are of the same magnitude. The specific heat of natural and

synthetic graphites is slightly lower than boron nitride. The surface areas vary, and this

could have an effect on the ability of the PF resin to wet the filler.

Table 3-8. Typical prices of the three different filler types.

Filler TypeTypical Price($/kg)

Synthetic Graphite 3 – 7Natural Graphite 0.7 – 0.9Boron Nitride 100 - 110

Page 72: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

72

Chapter 3

The price of the natural graphite (S) is much lower than the price of the synthetic

graphites (TC, CTC, and L). The boron nitride (BN) is much more expensive than any of

the graphite fillers. Cost of the fillers greatly impacts the commercial feasibility of this

technology.

Scanning Electron Microscope Micrographs

Scanning electron microscope (SEM) micrographs were taken by Conoco, Inc ,

with the exception of the boron nitride powder (Personal Communication, 10-10-2000;

“Boron Nitride Powder Grade HCP”, 2001). All photographs were taken at 50X except

of the boron nitride powder, which is shown at 1000X magnification.

Figure 3-11. SEM micrograph of Thermocarb™ Specialty Graphite (PersonalCommunication, 10-10-2000).

Page 73: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

73

Experimental Materials

Figure 3-12. SEM micrograph of Coarse Thermocarb™ Specialty Graphite (PersonalCommunication, 10-10-2000).

Figure 3-13. SEM micrograph of Lonza Manufactured Graphite (PersonalCommunication, 10-10-2000).

Page 74: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

74

Chapter 3

Figure 3-14. SEM micrograph of Signature® Crystalline Flake Graphite (PersonalCommunication, 10-10-2000).

Figure 3-15. SEM micrograph of Boron Nitride Powder HCP at 1000X magnification(“Boron Nitride Powder Grade HCP”, 2001).

Page 75: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

75

Experimental Materials

The ThermocarbTM Specialty Graphite and coarse ThermocarbTM Specialty

Graphite are the same synthetic graphite, except they are different particle sizes.

Qualitatively, the micrographs show that the ThermocarbTM Specialty Graphite has a wide

range of particle sizes, while the coarse ThermocarbTM Specialty Graphite is more uniform

in size since it doesn’t have as broad of a size distribution of particles. The Lonza

Manufactured Graphite size is also uniform in size but has much smoother edges than the

coarse ThermocarbTM Specialty Graphite. The Signature(R) Crystalline Flake Graphite has

a broad size distribution, and many of the particles appear to have a platelet geometry

typical of natural flake graphite. The boron nitride powder is much smaller in size and is

more randomly shaped.

Page 76: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

76

Chapter 4

Chapter 4. Experimental Methods

This chapter details the procedures used in the experimental work, and is broke

into four main parts: waferboard fabrication, waferboard test methods, resin test methods,

and statistical analysis methods.

4.1 Waferboard Fabrication

The main portion of experimental work centered on fabrication and testing of

waferboard made with and without thermally conductive fillers. Board fabrication for this

project began in April of 2000 and continued through July of 2001. Bill Yrjana and Katie

Torrey, along with undergraduate students from the Department of Chemical Engineering

made all boards for this project. Waferboard manufacturing was done in three different

experiments and are explained in detail in Sections 4.1.2 and 4.1.3.

4.1.1 Waferboard Fabrication Equipment

Most equipment used to manufacture boards was the property of the MTU School

of Forestry and Wood Products/Institute of Wood Research. The laboratory scale

production of waferboard is slightly different from the commercial production of OSB,

discussed in Chapter 2, but the basic steps are still there: blending, mat forming, and

pressing. The main pieces of equipment used in the manufacturing process for this

project, are discussed in the paragraphs below.

Bench-Top Mixer

A bench-top overhead mixer was used for pre-mixing filler and water, if needed,

with the resin. The mixer was a Janke & Kunkel, model RW 20 DZM, with a speed range

of 72 to 2400 rpm. A 3-paddle impeller was used.

Page 77: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

77

Experimental Methods

Figure 4-1. Bench top mixer used for mixing filler and resin during waferboardmanufacturing.

Drum Blender

An in-house fabricated 1.2-meter diameter, 0.8-meter deep blending drum was

used. Inside the drum were 63.5-mm long wooden dowels arranged in a zig-zag pattern,

which were intended to facilitate tumbling and mixing. The drum rotates at 18 rpm.

Page 78: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

78

Chapter 4

Figure 4-2. Drum blender used during waferboard manufacturing.

Resin Application System

The resin spraying system consisted of a De Vilbiss AGF-506-92E pressure feed,

air atomized, automatic spray gun and a DeVilbiss KB-555 two quart pressure cup

assembly. The spray gun was mounted on an arm that was inserted in the center of the

blending drum.

Forming Boxes

Forming boxes were fabricated out of plywood and the inside dimensions were

simply the target size of the finished board. The top and bottom of the forming box was

open so that strands may be dropped into the box to form the mat, and the box may be

lifted off over the mat, after it is formed.

Page 79: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

79

Experimental Methods

Figure 4-3. Forming box used to form mats during waferboard manufacturing.

A solid metal caul sheet was placed under the forming box. A cover that fits just

inside the box was used to pre-compress by hand the mat before the box was removed and

the mat placed in the press. After the forming box is removed a second solid metal caul

sheet was placed on top of the mat. The caul sheets were approximately 0.91 mm thick.

Figure 4-4. Waferboard mat prior to pressing.

Page 80: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

80

Chapter 4

Hydraulic Press

A manually controlled Francis hydraulic press, model 18 x 18 x 14 ¾ 700 psi, 113

ton, with Carver 9 KW electrically heated platens, was used for pressing the mats. Metal

stops were used to limit press closure to the desired board thickness. The press platen

size of the press is 457 mm x 457 mm.

Figure 4-5. Francis hydraulic press used in panel manufacturing.

Page 81: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

81

Experimental Methods

Figure 4-6. Francis hydraulic press pressing a mat.

4.1.2 Experiment 1 Experimental Procedure and Naming Scheme

To make boards for Experiment 1, the moisture content from up to three barrels of

strands were measured in the morning, averaged, and used to calculate the proper

amounts of strands, resin, and filler needed to make three boards per blend, based on the

following target properties:

♦ Resin loading = 4 wt.% (4 g of solid resin/100 g of dry flakes)

♦ Filler loading = 1 wt.% (1 g of filler/100 g dry flakes)

♦ Outside dimensions = 457 mm x 457 mm (18 x 18 inches)

♦ Thickness = 18.3 mm (23/32 inch)

♦ Density = 0.641 g/cm3 (40 pcf)

Page 82: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

82

Chapter 4

In accordance with the formulation calculations, strands were weighed out and

placed in a 125-L (33-gal) plastic garbage can. Lousiana Pacific (LP) strands were used

for Experiment 1. Filler and resin were weighed and mixed with the overhead mixer at

2000 rpm for 5 minutes. Sample formulation calculations are in Appendix B.

Prior to blending, the spray gun and lines were flushed with about 75 to 80 grams

of intended resin. The purpose of this initial spray was to clear the system of previous

resin mix or cleaning water, to coat the lines with the new resin, and to check the spray

gun operation and pattern. Pressure cup air pressure was maintained at 138 kPa (20 psi)

during spraying. Spray gun adjusting values, “Fan” and “Atom” are adjusted to 2 turns

open (counterclockwise). The spray pattern was adjusted to a horizontal “fan” pattern.

Strands were placed in the blender, and the blender and spraying system turned on.

During blending, the resin was sprayed within the first two minutes. The flakes continued

to tumble for an additional three minutes for a total retention time of 5 minutes in the

blender. Blended flakes were then removed and stored in covered plastic garbage cans

until mat forming.

Three mats were made from each blend, and blending was generally done in the

morning (9am to noon), with as many as four blends being completed. Mat forming and

pressing was then completed between 12:30pm to 3:30pm.

Mats were formed with a random arrangement by weighing the desired amount of

flakes in a box and forming the mat by hand in the forming box, which was placed on the

floor over a caul sheet. After the mat was formed and pre-pressed by hand, the box was

removed and a caul sheet placed on top of the mat. The mat was then placed in the press.

The press was operated with a target platen temperature of 216oC (420 oF). The

press closing time was measured from the time the high-pressure pump started to when

tight contact of the stops was made, and varied from 30 to 90 seconds. The press time

was measured at the time of tight contact of the stops (end of the press closing time) until

the end of the pressing cycle. Boards were fabricated at a press time of 2.5, 4, and 5.5

Page 83: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

83

Experimental Methods

minutes. A 20 second degas time was included in the press time. The degas time is where

pressure is slowly reduced to release internal steam generated during pressing. The press

was then opened and the pressed board removed.

After pressing, boards were labeled in a consistent orientation based on their

position in the press (on the trailing end of the top face of the board). Boards were

allowed to cool to room temperature in the pilot plant for 24 hours before being trimmed

to 356 by 356 mm (14 x 14 inches) and stacked in the conditioning room. No type of hot-

stacking was used.

The types and number of boards made in a day varied throughout the summer of

2000. Towards the beginning of summer, boards of only one kind were made in a day.

Beginning in the middle of summer, multiple types of boards were made in one day, which

always included at least one blend of control boards. There was never an instance that all

types of boards were made in a single day.

Experiment 1 Naming Scheme

Panels were named with a three-part naming scheme (e.g. C-TC-A1) to easily

identify the filler type and press time. The first letter, “C”, designated this as Conoco’s

project. The rest of the name was broken down to:

C - {filler} - {press time}{panel number}

The fillers were abbreviated as:

C = control (no filler)

TC = Thermocarb™ Specialty Graphite

CTC = Coarse Thermocarb™ Specialty Graphite

L = Lonza Manufactured Graphite

S = Signature® Crystalline Flake Graphite

BN = Boron Nitride Powder

Page 84: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

84

Chapter 4

The press times were coded as:

A = 2.5 minutes

B = 4.0 minutes

C = 5.5 minutes

For example, C-TC-A1 is the first panel made with 1% ThermocarbTM Specialty

Graphite at a 2.5-minute press time.

4.1.3 Experiments 2 and 3 Experimental Procedure and Naming Scheme

To make boards for Experiments 2 and 3, the moisture content from up to three

barrels of strands were measured the day before. Averaged moisture content values were

used to calculate the proper amounts of strands, resin, and filler needed to make three

boards per blend prior to manufacturing boards the following day. Calculations were

based on the following target properties:

♦ Resin loading = 4 wt.% (4 g of solid resin/100 g of dry flakes)

♦ Filler loading = 1 wt.% (1 g of filler/100 g dry flakes)

♦ Outside dimensions = 406 mm x 406 mm (16 x 16 inches)

♦ Thickness = 18.3 mm (23/32 inch)

♦ Density = 0.641 g/cm3 (40 pcf)

In accordance with the formulation calculations, strands were weighed and placed

in a 125-L (33-gal) plastic garbage can. MTU-made strands were used for Experiment 2

and 3. Water was added to the resin to bring the moisture content of the entire mat to 5

wt %. Some of the later manufacturing days the moisture content of the strands were too

high and the moisture content of the board prior to pressing was as high as 5.6 wt %.

Filler, resin, and water were weighed and mixed initially with the overhead mixer at 2000

rpm for 5 minutes. The resin continued to be mixed at 2000 rpm until it was needed in the

blending process, to ensure settling did not take place. The additional mixing time ranged

from five minutes to as many as fifteen depending upon the circumstances. The additional

Page 85: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

85

Experimental Methods

mixing was believed to not have affected the properties of the resin or degraded the size of

the fillers used.

Prior to blending, the spray gun and lines were flushed with 75 to 80 grams of

intended resin. Pressure cup air pressure was maintained at 138 kPa (20 psi) during

spraying. Spray gun adjusting values, “Fan” and “Atom” are adjusted to 2 turns open

(counterclockwise). The spray pattern was adjusted to a horizontal “fan” pattern.

Strands were placed into the blender, and the blender and spraying system turned

on. During blending the resin was sprayed within the first two minutes. The flakes

continued to tumble for an additional three minutes for a total retention time of 5 minutes

in the blender. Blended flakes were then removed and stored in covered plastic garbage

cans until mat forming.

Three mats were made from each blend, and forming was done immediately after

the blend was finished. Mats were formed with a random arrangement by hand and were

formed on a large digital scale, with the caul sheet and then forming box placed on it. The

scale was an OHAUS model B50P with a model CD-11 indicator. It's max capacity is 50

kg, with 0.005 kg increments. Strands were added to the mat until the desired mat weight

was obtained. After the mat was formed and pre-pressed by hand, the box was removed

and a caul sheet placed on top of the mat. The mat was then placed in the press.

The press was operated with a target platen temperature of 216oC (420 oF). The

total press time was measured from the time the high-pressure pump started until the end

of the pressing cycle, which is different than in Experiment 1. This was changed from

Experiment 1 to give a more consistent “total in-press” time. The time for the press to

close was also recorded and was measured from the time the high-pressure pump started

until tight contact of the stops was made. Boards were pressed at a total press time of 4.5

minutes for Experiment 2 and 4 minutes for Experiment 3. A 20 second degas time was

included in the total press time. The press was then opened and the board removed.

Page 86: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

86

Chapter 4

After pressing, boards were labeled in a consistent orientation based on their

position in the press (on the trailing end of the top face of the board). The boards were

allowed to cool to room temperature in the pilot plant for 24 hours before being trimmed

to 305 by 305 mm (12 x 12 inches) and stacked in the conditioning room. No type of hot-

stacking was used.

Each day of manufacturing contained a complete set of data including all fillers and

the control. One blend of each type of board (control, and five fillers), were made each

day, which resulted in three boards of each type to be made. This resulted in a total of six

blends that were finished in a day. The assembly line method was much more time

efficient, which allowed for this improved output.

Experiments 2 and 3 Naming Scheme

Panels were named with a three-part naming scheme (e.g. C2-TC-A1) to easily

identify the filler type and press time. The differences between the naming scheme for

Experiment 1 and Experiment 2 and 3 are that the first section for Experiment 2 and 3 is

labeled “C2” instead of “C”, and the press time codes have different meanings. The “C”

designated that this was the Conoco project and the “2” was used to distinguish from

Experiment 1 and Experiment 2 and 3 boards.

Again, the name is broken down to:

C2 - {filler} - {press time}{panel number}

The fillers were abbreviated the same as for Experiment 1, but the press times

were coded as:

A = 4.0 minutes (Experiment 3)

B = 4.5 minutes (Experiment 2)

For example, C2-TC-A1 is the first panel made with 1% Thermocarb at a 4 minute

press time (which was Experiment 3).

Page 87: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

87

Experimental Methods

4.2 Waferboard Test Methods

A total of eight different tests were done in the waferboard testing phases.

Abbreviations for each test are shown in parentheses were appropriate:

1. Average density over entire board

2. Moisture content (M)

3. Internal bond (IB)

4. Static bend (SB)

5. 24-hour thickness swell (TS)

6. 2-hour boil thickness swell (BTS)

7. Temperature Profile

8. Thermal conductivity

Tests 1 through 6 were performed on Experiment 1 boards, but only tests 2 and 3

were performed on Experiment 2 and 3 boards. Test 7 was performed on boards made

using Experiment 1’s manufacturing procedure and were not used for anything else.

Test 8 was performed only on selected Experiment 2 boards.

4.2.1 Panel Conditioning and Cutting

Prior to testing, boards were conditioned to approximately 25 oC and 58 % relative

humidity. A photograph of the conditioning room is shown in Figure 4-7.

Page 88: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

88

Chapter 4

Figure 4-7. Conditioning room where boards and samples were stored at a constanttemperature and humidity.

Testing of boards has shown these conditions to be around 6 wt % equilibrium

moisture content (EMC). This means that the waferboard that was tested was usually 6

wt. % water (dry basis). The weights of Experiment 1 boards were monitored periodically

to determine when EMC was reached. The time to reach a stable weight took about a

month, on average. Due to time constraints and the fact that most moisture was gained or

lost within the first two weeks of conditioning, boards for Experiment 2 and 3 were not

conditioned as long. These boards were in the conditioning room a minimum of two

weeks before they were cut for testing. Prepared samples were stored in the conditioning

room until testing, also.

Page 89: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

89

Experimental Methods

Below is the cutting diagram used for Experiment 1 boards.

Figure 4-8. Cutting diagram used for Experiment 1 boards, indicating tests performed oneach board.

For Experiment 1 boards two static bending (SB) tests, one thickness swell (TS)

test, one boil thickness swell (BTS) test, one moisture (M) test, and four internal bond

(IB) tests were performed. This left one 51-mm sample left over. One thing to notice is

Page 90: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

90

Chapter 4

that the location within the board was not recorded. The four IB samples could have

come from any of the six 51 x 51 mm samples cut.

Below is the cutting diagram used for Experiment 2 and 3 boards:

Figure 4-9. Cutting diagram used for Experiment 2 and 3 boards, indicating testsperformed on each board.

Page 91: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

91

Experimental Methods

After analysis of the Experiment 1 results, it was decided that more focus should

be put into the IB testing. For Experiments 2 and 3, one moisture sample and 25 IB

samples were cut, with special attention paid to the location of each sample within the

board. For Experiment 2, all IB samples were tested. After analysis of Experiment 2

data, it was decided that only the center 12 IB samples from Experiment 3 boards would

be tested (sample numbers 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 10, 11, 12, 15, 16, 17, and 18).

4.2.2 Density

Density is an important property that can affect many of the physical properties of

OSB. It is controlled by two main factors, the density of the raw material and the

compaction of the mat during hot-pressing (Kelly, 1977).

All density data in this thesis was reported as the oven-dry weight per volume at

EMC, which was usually 6 wt %. Dry weights were calculated from EMC weights using

the measured moisture content for each board, described in Section 4.2.3. The density

was calculated as:

Mtwl

m 100*

**=ρ (4-1)

Where,

ρ = density (g/cm3)

m = mass at EMC (g)

l = length at EMC (cm)

w = width at EMC (cm)

t = thickness at EMC (cm)

M = moisture content at EMC (%)

Prior to cutting samples from the board, the average density of the entire board

was measured. The conditioned panel was weighed and length and width were measured

at the center of each dimension using large calipers. The thickness was measured at about

Page 92: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

92

Chapter 4

76 mm from the edge at the center of each side using a thickness gauge. The four

thickness readings were averaged. Average density measurements were done on

Experiment 1 boards only.

The density of each IB, SB, TS, and BTS sample was also calculated. Single

measurements of the length, width, and thickness were measured with calipers, and the

density calculated using the equation above.

4.2.3 Moisture content

Properties of wood vary with moisture content in the sample, which was why

samples were conditioned to an equilibrium moisture content (EMC). The moisture

content was measured to determine the actual moisture content at EMC. Most samples

were around 6 wt % EMC. Data for all samples are in Appendix C, D, and E for each of

the waferboard manufacturing experiments. Moisture content was calculated using the

following equation.

100*dry

drywet

m

mmM

−= (4-2)

Where,

M = moisture content at EMC (%)

mwet

= mass at EMC (g)

mdry

= oven dry mass (g)

The moisture content was measured on conditioned 51 x 51-mm samples. The

sample was weighed and placed in an oven set between 100 and 110 oC for 24 hours at

atmospheric pressure. Samples were weighed again after drying to determine the oven dry

weight.

Page 93: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

93

Experimental Methods

4.2.4 Internal Bond

Internal bond tests are used to measure the bonding strength between the wood

flakes and the resin holding them together. A steel or aluminum block is glued to the

sample and used to hold the sample in the test machine. The test machine then pulls the

sample apart at a uniform rate of motion dependent upon the thickness of the sample. The

test continues until the sample fails. The important data point in this test is the maximum

load on the sample before it fails (breaks).

The internal bond strength is calculated using the peak load and actual sample

dimensions.

lw

pIB

*= (4-3)

Where,

IB = internal bond strength (kPa)

p = maximum load (kN)

w = width (m)

l = length (m)

The importance of internal bond strength is that it indicates a better-bonded board.

The better the bond between the glue and strands, the better the strength properties of the

boards. Better cohesion of the board means better or more fully cured resin and thus

higher internal bonding within the board (Barry, 1999).

Square 51 mm samples were prepared by lightly sanding the top and bottom

surfaces. Length, width, thickness, and weight measurements were taken prior to gluing

the sample to the aluminum IB blocks using a hot-melt thermoplastic glue. Gluing was

done by heating up the blocks and glue on a large hot-plate, applying the sample to the

block, and cooling the sample on a platen cooled using tap water. A schematic of an IB

test specimen is shown in Figure 4-10.

Page 94: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

94

Chapter 4

t

Figure 4-10. ASTM specifications for the IB test specimen (“Standard Test Methods forEvaluating..”, 2000).

The internal bond samples were tested using a 4.4 kN (1000 lb) capacity ATS

universal testing machine operated with TestVue software. The test machine is shown in

Figure 4-11. The testing was performed according to ASTM Standard D 1037-96a,

Tensile Strength Perpendicular to Surface, sections 28 - 33. Per the standard, tests were

performed on 51 x 51 mm samples with a uniform rate of motion of the moveable

crosshead (“Standard Test Methods for Evaluating..”, 2000). A rate of 0.102 cm/min was

used for Experiment 1 and a rate of 0.147 cm/min was used for Experiments 2 and 3.

Both speeds meet standard specifications. A typical load verses displacement curve for a

well-bonded internal bond waferboard specimen is shown in Figure 4-12.

A peak load reading was recorded from the test and internal bond strength and

sample density were calculated for each sample. After testing the aluminium blocks were

removed by reheating the sample on the hot plate.

Page 95: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

95

Experimental Methods

Figure 4-11. Universal testing machine testing an internal bond test.

Figure 4-12. Typical load verses displacement curve for a well-bonded waferboardinternal bond test specimen, in English units.

Page 96: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

96

Chapter 4

4.2.5 Static Bending

The static bending test is a three point bend test, where a load is applied at a

constant rate of speed to the center of a sample spanning two supports until the sample

fails. Two results are obtained from the static bending test: flexural modulus of elasticity

(MOE) and modulus of rupture (MOR). MOE is a measure of material stiffness and MOR

is a measure of bending strength, which were tested to ensure that the addition of fillers

did not degrade the bending qualities of the board. Generally in OSB, longer strands

produce higher MOE and MOR values. Below is a picture of the test setup.

Figure 4-13. Set up for the static bending test.

MOE, also known as Youngs Modulus, was calculated by the testing software on

the computer. The software first generated a stress-strain curve from the test data. The

stress was calculated using the following equation.

22

3

ba

PLSf = (4-4)

Where,

Sf

= flexure stress (Pa)

P = load (N)

Page 97: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

97

Experimental Methods

L = span (m)

b = width (m)

a = thickness (m)

The strain was calculated using the following equation.

2

6

L

Daef = (4-5)

Where,

ef

= flexure strain (N/m)

D = midspan deflection (m)

MOE was then calculated using a least squares linear curve fit on data between 10

and 30 % of the peak load (“Series 1600..”, 1997). This range was reasonable since the

load-displacement curve that was generated during the test was linear within it.

MOR was calculated according to the following equation, as specified in ASTM

Standard D 1037-96a, Static Bending, section 20 (“Standard Test Methods for

Evaluating..”, 2000). This equation is the same as the stress equation shown above, and is

the stress at sample failure.

22

3

ba

PLMOR= (4-6)

Where,

MOR = modulus of rupture (Pa)

P = peak load (N)

The static bending samples were tested using a 4.4 kN (1000 lb) capacity ATS

universal testing machine operated with TestVue software. Samples were 76 mm by 356

mm and were tested over a span of 305 mm. The lower supports were rounded with a

diameter of 38.1 mm. The center loading was rounded with a diameter of 28.6 mm and

was lowered at a rate of 0.914 cm/min. Width and thickness measurements were made on

each sample, and MOE, MOR, and sample density were calculated for each. A typical

Page 98: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

98

Chapter 4

load verses displacement curve for a well-bonded static bending waferboard test specimen

is shown in Figure 4-14.

Figure 4-14. Typical load verses displacement curve for a well-bonded waferboard staticbending test specimen, in English units.

4.2.6 24-Hour Thickness Swell

The 24-hour thickness swell test is one measure of dimensional stability. The

sample is soaked in water and changes in weight, length, width, and thickness are

measured. Ideally, changes in these properties would be minimal, but reality dictates that

OSB and waferboard absorb large amounts of water and the thickness increases

significantly (called thickness swelling). This is one negative aspect of OSB since

environmental control is not available at most construction sites.

Thickness swelling is slightly lower in samples that have better bonding, although

thickness swelling can be reduced significantly with the addition of 1 wt % or less of wax

(based on the oven dry wood weight). This is how dimensional stability is improved in

commercial OSB.

Thickness swell was calculated according to ASTM Standard D 1037-96a, Water

Absorption and Thickness Swelling, section 106, and is shown in the equation below

(“Standard Test Methods for Evaluating..”, 2000).

Page 99: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

99

Experimental Methods

%100*i

if

T

TTTS

−= (4-7)

Where,

TS = thickness swell (%)

Tf

= thickness after soaking (mm)

Ti

= thickness before soaking (mm)

The 24-hour thickness swell test was done on 76 x 76 mm samples, submerged

horizontally in room temperature tap water for 24 hours. Weight, length, width and

thickness measurements were taken before and after testing. Thickness measurements

were taken 12.7 mm from the edge at the center of side, using a digital indicator, as shown

in Figure 4-15.

Figure 4-15. Diagram of measurement positions used in both thickness swell tests.

Page 100: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

100

Chapter 4

4.2.7 2-Hour Boil Thickness Swell

The 2-hour boil thickness swell test is simply another measure of dimensional

stability and bond durability. The hot water that the sample is soaked in simulates long

term weathering of the sample and tests how well the bonds within the board hold up.

Thickness swelling for the 2-hour boil test is calculated using the same equation presented

in Section 4.2.6.

This test was done on a 76 x 76 mm sample, submerged horizontally in 90 – 100

oC tap water for 2 hours. Weight, length, width and thickness measurements were taken

before and after testing. Thickness measurements were taken 12.7 mm from the edge at

the center of side, using a digital indicator, as shown in Figure 4-15.

4.2.8 Temperature Profile

Verification of the theory that thermally conductive fillers increases the heat

transfer into the center of the waferboard could be obtained by measuring the temperature

change of the waferboard mat during hot-pressing. This was done using ThermocarbTM

Specialty Graphite at 0.5 and 1 wt % loading level and compared to waferboard not

containing any filler.

Boards used for this testing were made using Experiment 1 materials and methods.

Two boards were made per blend, and one blend was made for each type to tested (TC

and control). This resulted in six boards total: two each of 0.5 wt % TC, 1 wt % TC, and

control. The internal mat temperature was measured as the board was pressed using three

J-type thermocouples placed in the vertical center of the mat.

Half of the strands, by mass, were formed in the mat, and three type-J

thermocouples were placed in the center of the mat, approximately 50 mm apart. The

second half of the strands were formed over the thermocouples. The mat was loaded into

the press, and manual data acquisition was started when the top of the mat touched the

Page 101: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

101

Experimental Methods

top platen. Temperature readings were taken every 10 seconds from each thermocouple.

This experiment required five people on hand: one person to operate the press, one

person to time and call when readings were required, and three people to record

thermocouple readings.

The data for each board was analyzed by plotting the internal temperature verses

the press time. To compare all data, the six thermocouple readings from each type of

board were averaged and the averaged temperatures were plotted again press time and

compared.

4.2.9 Thermal Conductivity

The through-plane thermal conductivity of Experiment 2 waferboard containing no

filler and coarse ThermocarbTM Specialty Graphite was tested using a Holometrix Thermal

Conductivity Analyzer, Model TCA-300.

A schematic of how this machine works is shown in Figure 4-16. The sample is

placed between two platens, which are maintained at different temperatures causing heat

to flow from the hotter (upper) to the colder (lower) platen. A cylindrical guard heater

surrounding the sample is used to minimize lateral heat transfer. The amount of heat

passing through the sample is measured with a thin heat flow transducer located under the

lower platen and used to calculate the thermal conductivity of the sample (“Operation &

Maintenance..”, 1997).

Page 102: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

102

Chapter 4

Figure 4-16. Diagram of thermal conductivity test method (“Operation &Maintenance..”, 1997).

Samples for thermal conductivity tests were cut from the saved leftover portion of

selected Experiment 2 boards. Thermal conductivity samples were cylindrical and

approximately 50 mm in diameter. They were cut using a 54 mm hole saw and lightly

sanded on a belt sander to smooth down the rough edges left from the saw. Samples were

dried in an oven for 24 hours between 100 and 110 oC at atmospheric pressure to remove

all moisture from the sample and then stored in moisture barrier bags until they were

tested. The sample thickness varied from 18.09 mm to 20.99 mm. The thermal

conductivity was measured according to ASTM standard F 433, at an average

temperature through the sample of 55 oC (“Standard Practice..”, 1987).

Page 103: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

103

Experimental Methods

4.3 Resin Test Methods

Two tests were done on the resin/filler system to determine viscosity and thermal

conductivity. These properties were tested to determine how they changed with the

addition of the thermally conductive fillers.

4.3.1 Viscosity

Viscosity of the resin/filler mixtures were measured to determine how the viscosity

of the resin changed with the addition of the fillers. This information may be useful for a

commercial trial of this technology to determine if the mixture can be pumped at a given

filler loading.

The viscosity was measured at room temperature using a Brookfield Digital

Viscometer, Model DV-II+, RV type. The tests were run at room temperature in a low

form, 600-mL beaker, containing approximately 500 mL of sample. The spindle guard

was used with the #2 spindle. The tests were run at 50 rpm, except for those samples that

had a viscosity less than 800 cP. Viscosities between 800 and 2000 cP were run at 20

rpm, and viscosities over 2000 cP were run at 10 rpm.

Pure PF resin (Borden Cascophen OS707, 57 wt % solids) was measured, along

with resin/filler mixtures using all five fillers, with loading levels of 0.5, 0.75, and 1 g filler/

4 g of wet resin. The waferboard manufacturing for this project, contained 1 g filler/4 g of

resin solids, which corresponds to 0.57 g filler/4 g wet resin. This filler loading is in-

between the measured data points. The PF resin, which is usually kept in a refrigerator in

order to lengthen its shelf life, was set out overnight to allow it to warm up to room

temperature.

Samples were prepared by pouring approximately 500 mL of resin into a large,

tared beaker and weighed. The resin weight was used to calculate the target filler weight

according to the desired filler loading (22, 33, or 44 wt %). Filler was weighed, added to

Page 104: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

104

Chapter 4

the resin, and pre-mixed with the overhead mixer at medium-low speed. After mixing,

approximately 500 mL of the mixture was poured into a 600-mL beaker and the

temperature of the mixture was recorded.

Only one sample of each type was made, but three viscosity measurements were

made on each sample. The sample was mixed between each reading to ensure a

homogeneous mixture. Viscosity was measured after five rotations of the spindle (6

seconds at 50 rpm). The viscosity continued to drop as the sample sat in the viscometer.

This was most likely due to settling, and was why the sample was remixed between each

reading.

4.3.2 Thermal Conductivity

Testing the thermal conductivity of the resin and resin/filler mixtures involved a

series of steps, including: making solid, void-free samples; measuring the thermal

conductivity; and determining the actual filler weight percent in the sample. The weight

percent of filler within the sample was calculated from measured densities and the

reported theoretical density of the fillers (see Section 3.3.4).

Void-Free PF Resin Samples

To measure the thermal conductivity accurately, void free samples of the resin and

resin/filler mixtures had to be made. The procedure for making these samples was simply

to preheat the resin or resin mixture until it became thick like honey, pour the mixture into

a mold and heat the mixture under pressure until it cured, so that no bubbles or voids

could form. The PF samples had to be prepared carefully, to prevent cracking and

crumbling. This was especially true with the pure PF samples.

To do this, approximately 75 to 80 mL of resin was weighed in a tared 250-mL

beaker. The resin weight was divided by 4 to determine the target filler weight.

Theoretically this should result in a sample with 44 wt % filler on a resin solids basis. The

filler was weighed and added to the resin. The mixture was stirred with a magnetic stir

Page 105: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

105

Experimental Methods

bar and heated on a combination hotplate/stirrer for approximately 20 minutes or until the

temperature reached a boiling point around 106 oC. The mixture continues to be heated

until it reaches the proper consistency. The proper consistency was determined by trial

and error but usually occurs when it “strings”. That is, when a stirring rod is dipped into

the mixture, the drops that fall from it trail strings as they fall. Waiting until the proper

consistency is reached is very important since too thin of a mixture causes excessive resin

squeeze out from the mold during pressing and a mixture that is too thick will solidify

before it can be poured into the mold.

The mold that was used was made out of aluminum and made one 51 mm

diameter, cylindrical sample. The mold consists of two parts, a bottom half that contains

the resin mixture, and a top half, called the ram, that fits into the bottom half to apply

pressure on the sample. A schematic of the mold is shown in Figure 4-17.

Ram

Figure 4-17. Schematic of the mold used to make void-free PF resin samples.

Approximately 30 g of the mixture is poured into the bottom half of the mold and

then the mold is assembled. The entire mold was first sprayed with a silicone mold release

and preheated to 90 - 105 oC before the mixture is poured into it. The mold is also tilted

slightly during pouring and assembly to avoid trapping air in it. The sample was then

Page 106: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

106

Chapter 4

pressed at 4.4 kN for 5 minutes, 8.9 kN for 5 minutes, and 17.8 kN for 5 minutes, for a

total pressing time of 15 minutes at a press temperature of 90 - 105 oC.

The press used in this experiment was a manually controlled Dake Hydraulic Press,

Model 44-251, shown in Figure 4-18. It has 318 mm wide by 483 mm long, electrically

heated platens, with a 152 mm press opening, and 400 kN pressure capacity. The press

also has a hand pump to make small pressure changes. The temperature of the top and

bottom platens are monitored by two separate mercury thermometer and controlled

manually by independent switches that turn either the top or bottom platen heater on or

off.

Immediately after pressing the sample is 51 mm in diameter and 10 mm thick,

before it begins to shrink. Final curing of the resin is completed by post cure in an

atmospheric pressure, 100 oC oven for 48 hours. The sample is then either milled or

sanded to remove surface imperfections and to provide a flat surface for the testing

apparatus. A prepared sample was typically 46 mm in diameter and 9 mm thick, but

depended on how much milling or sanding was needed.

Thermal Conductivity

The thermal conductivity was measured using a Holometrix Thermal Conductivity

Analyzer, Model TCA-300, shown in Figure 4-15. Section 4.2.9 describes this equipment.

The thermal conductivity was measured according to ASTM standard F 433, at an

average temperature through the sample of 55 oC (“Standard Practice..”, 1987). The

diameter of the samples ranged from 36 to 48 mm and thickness ranged from 3 to 11 mm.

Density

As one step in determining the actual weight fraction of filler in each sample, the

density of the solid PF and PF/filler mixtures were measured. The density was determined

according to the Archimedean Principle. This principle states that a solid body immersed

Page 107: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

107

Experimental Methods

in a liquid, loses as much of its own weight as the weight of the liquid it has displaced

(“Operating Instructions”). The density of the solid PF and PF/filler mixtures were

measured by immersing the sample in water, a liquid of known density. The sample was

first weighed dry in air and then weighed while immersed in water. The density of the

sample is then calculated by the equation shown below.

ws BA

A ρρ−

= (4-8)

Where,

ρs = density of the sample (g/cm3)

ρw = density of water (g/cm3)

A = weight of the sample in air (g)

B = weight of the sample immersed in water (g)

Filler Weight Fraction

The weight fraction of the filler in the solid PF was estimated using the rule of

mixtures, shown in the equation below.

∑=

= n

i i

ic w

1

1

ρ

ρ (4-9)

Where,

ρc

= density of the composite (g/cm3)

ρi

= density of component i (g/cm3)

wi

= weight fraction of component i

n = number of components in composite

Assuming that there is only solid resin and filler in the samples, which means that

there are no voids, no water, or other materials, the equation is simplified to the one

shown below, where the weight fraction of the resin and filler add up to one.

Page 108: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

108

Chapter 4

f

f

r

rc ww

ρρ

ρ+

= 1

(4-10)

Where,

ρc

= density of the mixture (g/cm3)

ρr

= density of the resin (g/cm3)

ρf

= density of the filler (g/cm3)

wr

= weight fraction of the resin

wf

= weight fraction of the filler

The density of the solid PF resin was assumed to be the average of the measured

densities of the pure PF samples. The density of filler was assumed to be the theoretical

density of the fillers reported by the vendors given in Section 3.3.4. Using the measured

density of the mixture, the weight fraction of the filler was calculated from the rearranged

equation shown below.

−= f

c

fr

frfw ρ

ρρρ

ρρ )(

1 (4-11)

4.4 Statistical Analysis Methods

Two statistical analysis techniques were used to analyze the data: two-sample t-

test and analysis of variance. The t-test was used on Experiment 1 data to determine if

there was statistical significance between physical properties of waferboard containing a

specific filler and control waferboard. The analysis of variance is a more sophisticated

analysis that was used on Experiment 2 and 3 data. The analysis of variance compared

the IB results of control and filler waferboard and also how those values changed for

waferboard made on different days.

Page 109: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

109

Experimental Methods

4.4.1 Two Sample t-Test

A t-test was used extensively to analyze the Experiment 1 results to determine if

the filler data was statistically different from the control data.

The formula for t, which is the statistic for small-samples test concerning

difference between two means, and degrees of freedom are shown below (Miller, 1985).

fc

fcfc

ffcc

fccalculated nn

nnnn

snsn

xxt

+−+

−+−

−=

)2(

)1()1(

)(22

(4-12)

Where,

tcalculated = calculated t

xc

= mean of Control data

xf

= mean of filler data

nc

= number of Control samples

nf

= number of filler samples

sc

= standard deviation of Control data

sf

= standard deviation of filler data

2−+= fc nnν (4-13)

Where,

ν = degrees of freedom

The test is if xc – x

f = 0 (are the same). This hypothesis is reject if t

calculated > t

critical,

and the alternative hypothesis, xc – x

f not equal to 0, is accepted, meaning that the mean

property values are different. The table for the critical t values for a 2-tail 95% confidence

interval is shown in Table 4-1.

Page 110: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

110

Chapter 4

Table 4-1. Critical t-values for 2-tail 95% confidence interval (Miller, 1985).

υ t0.025

1 12.7062 4.3033 3.1824 2.7765 2.5716 2.4477 2.3658 2.3069 2.26210 2.22811 2.20112 2.17913 2.16014 2.14515 2.13116 2.12017 2.11018 2.10119 2.09320 2.08621 2.08022 2.07423 2.06924 2.06425 2.06026 2.05627 2.05228 2.04829 2.045inf. 1.960

4.4.2 Analysis of Variance

Two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to study the results of

Experiments 2 and 3. In general, a two-way ANOVA is used to investigate the

Page 111: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

111

Experimental Methods

relationship between a response variable (in this case IB values) and two factors (filler and

day made). The ANOVA determined if there were differences between the mean IB

values of waferboard made using different fillers and waferboard made on different days.

ANOVA is an extension of the two-sample t-test used with Experiment 1 data, in

that it compares the equality of more than two means (“User’s Guide 2”, 2000). In this

way, comparisons between the IB values of different fillers, not just between one filler and

control, can be compared and additional conclusions can be drawn about how the fillers

compared to each other.

In Experiments 2 and 3, three boards of each formulation were made and typically

12 IB samples were measured on each board. For each board, the center 12 IB samples

were averaged and a two-way ANOVA done on the data. The Table 4-2 below shows

graphically how the data was analyzed. “Avg” IB 1, 2, and 3 is the average of the center

12 IB samples from boards 1, 2, and 3. Each of the three boards was a replicate, and each

day the experiment was run, was an attempt to duplicate the results. So three replicates of

each type of board were made on each day, and the experiment was repeated each day

boards were pressed (5 days for Experiment 2 and 3 days for Experiment 3).

Table 4-2. ANOVA analysis used to analyze Experiment 2 and 3 data.

Control TC CTC L S BN

Day 1 Avg IB 1Avg IB 2Avg IB 3

Avg IB 1Avg IB 2Avg IB 3

Avg IB 1Avg IB 2Avg IB 3

Avg IB 1Avg IB 2Avg IB 3

Avg IB 1Avg IB 2Avg IB 3

Avg IB 1Avg IB 2Avg IB 3

Day 2 Avg IB 1Avg IB 2Avg IB 3

Avg IB 1Avg IB 2Avg IB 3

Avg IB 1Avg IB 2Avg IB 3

Avg IB 1Avg IB 2Avg IB 3

Avg IB 1Avg IB 2Avg IB 3

Avg IB 1Avg IB 2Avg IB 3

Day 3 Avg IB 1Avg IB 2Avg IB 3

Avg IB 1Avg IB 2Avg IB 3

Avg IB 1Avg IB 2Avg IB 3

Avg IB 1Avg IB 2Avg IB 3

Avg IB 1Avg IB 2Avg IB 3

Avg IB 1Avg IB 2Avg IB 3

Page 112: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

112

Chapter 4

The analysis was done using MinitabTM statistical software (“User’s Guide 2”,

2000). “Two-way” was chosen under the “Stat” then “ANOVA” menu. The average IB

value for each board was entered in “Response”, the day the board was made was the

“Row Factor”, and the filler used was the “Column Factor”. The means and confidence

intervals were displayed for both row and column factors.

The output from MinitabTM gave an F-value and calculated the probability of the

hypothesis that the mean IB values were the same. The 95% confidence level was chosen,

which meant that probability values less than 0.05 were determined to be statistically

significant. That is, the factor (filler or day) was considered to be statistically significant if

the probability value was less than 0.05.

Mean and confidence intervals for each day and filler were also displayed with the

ANOVA results. The confidence intervals were used to determine which IB values from

boards made on different days were different and which fillers were had significantly

higher or lower IB values when compared to controls.

Page 113: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

113

Experimental Results and Discussion

Chapter 5. Experimental Results and Discussion

This chapter discusses in detail the results of the research conducted. Results are

broken into the main sections in which they were completed. First, Experiments 1, 2, and

3 (waferboard manufacturing and testing) are discussed. Then, the results of other tests

performed, including temperature profiles, viscosity, and thermal conductivity tests, are

presented.

5.1 Experiment 1 Results: Summer 2000 Waferboard

Manufacturing

In Experiment 1, the goal was to make boards with all of the different fillers

throughout the summer of 2000 and test them to compare mechanical properties (internal

bond (IB), flexural modulus of elasticity (MOE), modulus of rupture (MOR), 24-hour

soak thickness swell (TS), and 2-hour boil thickness swell (BTS)) of all boards. We

combined the results of all boards made throughout the entire summer to draw

conclusions. A t-test was used to determine if there were statistical differences between

control and filler boards at the 95% confidence level. Results were obtained for each

different press time and mechanical property tested and are presented in the next five

tables.

5.1.1 Summary of Testing Results

A minimum of five boards were fabricated at each press time with each filler at a

loading level of 1 wt %, on an oven dried wood weight basis. A summary of the number

of boards made in Experiment 1 is shown in Table 5-1.

Page 114: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

114

Chapter 5

Table 5-1. A summary of the number of boards made in Experiment 1 with each filler, ateach press time.

Press Time(min) Control TC CTC L S BN2.5 12 6 5 6 6 54.0 16 7 7 8 9 55.5 17 8 6 7 12 5

In Tables 5-2 through 5-6 are the results of the five major tests conducted on the

waferboard. A separate table, organized by press time, is shown for each mechanical

property tested. The average, standard deviation, and number of samples measured,

which is labeled as “count”, is shown for each filler. Typically for each board the

following tests were done: four internal bond (IB); two static bending (SB), the flexural

modulus of elasticity (MOE) and modulus of rupture (MOR) test; one 24-hour soak

thickness swell (TS); and one 2-hour boil thickness swell (BTS). See Section 4.2 for

details on the mechanical properties testing. The results summarized in the next five tables

do not include samples thrown out due to mistakes made during testing, samples that were

not tested due to poor bonding (delamination), or boards that were only made for

demonstration purposes. Individual sample data for Experiment 1 on all tests run

(moisture, density, IB, SB, TS, BTS) are in Appendix C.

Below the data for each press time are variables used for the t-test. Details of how

the t-test was performed are given in Section 4.4.1. To review, the statistical significance

was determined by comparing the calculated t (tcalculated

) to the critical t (tcritical

).

If tcalculated

> tcritical

then the control value and the filler value being tested are

statistically different at the 95% confidence interval, and the result listed in the table is

“yes” and shaded gray. For example in Table 5-2, compare the mean IB results of the 4

minute control (average = 306 kPa) to the 4 minute TC (average = 403 kPa), tcalculated

(3.849) > tcritical

(1.960), therefore the result in the table is “yes” and the values are

Page 115: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

115

Experim

ental Results and D

iscussion

Table 5-2. Experiment 1 internal bond (IB) results and t-test determining the statistical significance between control values and the fivefiller values.

Press Time(min) Control TC CTC L S BN

2.5 Average (kPa)

Std. Dev. * 2.5-minute samples delaminated prior to testing *

Dat

a

CountCalculated tDegrees of FreedomCritical tt-

test

Significant?

4.0 Average (kPa) 306 403 311 304 272 334

Std. Dev. 115 96 93 74 87 120

Dat

a

Count 64 27 28 32 36 20Calculated t 3.849 0.199 0.078 1.534 0.943Degrees of Freedom 89 90 94 98 82Critical t 1.960 1.960 1.960 1.960 1.960t-

test

Significant? yes no no no no

5.5 Average (kPa) 390 423 420 354 397 408

Std. Dev. 98 112 98 92 90 91

Dat

a

Count 64 28 23 28 48 20Calculated t 1.405 1.229 1.658 0.337 0.721Degrees of Freedom 90 85 90 110 82Critical t 1.960 1.960 1.960 1.960 1.960t-

test

Significant? no no no no no

Page 116: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

116

Chapter 5

Table 5-3. Experiment 1 flexural modulus of elasticity (MOE) results and t-test determining the statistical significance between controlvalues and the five filler values.

Press Time(min) Control TC CTC L S BN

2.5 Average (MPa) 910 900 1,150 600 530 470

Std. Dev. 990 470 1,010 220 270 210D

ata

Count 18 10 9 10 12 5Calculated t 0.024 0.583 0.952 1.280 0.977Degrees of Freedom 26 25 26 28 21Critical t 2.056 2.060 2.056 2.048 2.080t-

test

Significant? no no no no no

4.0 Average (MPa) 4,390 4,060 4,130 4,040 4,230 4,400

Std. Dev. 520 440 590 510 390 280

Dat

a

Count 32 14 14 16 18 10Calculated t 2.053 1.485 2.182 1.151 0.035Degrees of Freedom 44 44 46 48 40Critical t 1.960 1.960 1.960 1.960 1.960t-

test

Significant? yes no yes no no

5.5 Average (MPa) 4,580 4,260 4,330 4,540 4,630 4,550

Std. Dev. 500 360 610 550 370 320

Dat

a

Count 32 14 12 14 24 10Calculated t 2.176 1.391 0.246 0.363 0.220Degrees of Freedom 44 42 44 54 40Critical t 1.960 1.960 1.960 1.960 1.960t-

test

Significant? yes no no no no

Page 117: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

117

Experim

ental Results and D

iscussion

Table 5-4. Experiment 1 modulus of rupture (MOR) results and t-test determining the statistical significance between control valuesand the five filler values.

Press Time(min) Control TC CTC L S BN

2.5 Average (MPa) 14.8 11.6 14.9 12.3 9.7 11.0

Std. Dev. 8.9 2.2 6.5 2.8 1.9 3.1

Dat

a

Count 18 10 9 10 12 5Calculated t 1.096 0.043 0.839 1.941 0.916Degrees of Freedom 26 25 26 28 21Critical t 2.056 2.060 2.056 2.048 2.080t-

test

Significant? no no no no no

4.0 Average (MPa) 46.6 42.1 46.2 44.4 41.0 44.0

Std. Dev. 8.2 6.6 4.7 4.4 6.5 4.8

Dat

a

Count 32 14 14 16 18 10Calculated t 1.834 0.157 1.020 2.505 0.953Degrees of Freedom 44 44 46 48 40Critical t 1.960 1.960 1.960 1.960 1.960t-te

st

Significant? no no no yes no

5.5 Average (MPa) 47.7 45.2 46.7 46.9 47.1 46.2

Std. Dev. 7.8 7.5 5.1 9.0 6.8 3.2

Dat

a

Count 32 14 12 14 24 10Calculated t 1.036 0.440 0.329 0.330 0.609Degrees of Freedom 44 42 44 54 40Critical t 1.960 1.960 1.960 1.960 1.960t-

test

Significant? no no no no no

Page 118: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

118

Chapter 5

Table 5-5. Experiment 1 24-hour soak thickness swell (TS) results and t-test determining the statistical significance between controlvalues and the five filler values.

Press Time(min) Control TC CTC L S BN

2.5 Average (%) 42.4 36.8 35.5 42.4 45.8 44.0

Std. Dev. 8.3 2.8 10.3 7.1 5.3 4.2D

ata

Count 11 5 4 6 6 4Calculated t 1.451 1.351 0.001 0.880 0.364Degrees of Freedom 14 13 15 15 13Critical t 2.145 2.16 2.131 2.131 2.16t-

test

Significant? no no no no no

4.0 Average (%) 29.5 28.1 24.3 27.1 29.9 29.1

Std. Dev. 3.1 2.2 4.6 4.1 2.9 1.9

Dat

a

Count 17 7 7 8 9 7Calculated t 1.165 3.281 1.666 0.324 0.327Degrees of Freedom 22 22 23 24 22Critical t 2.074 2.074 2.069 2.064 2.074t-

test

Significant? no yes no no no

5.5 Average (%) 27.4 27.5 21.8 26.2 29.4 27.2

Std. Dev. 3.7 2.3 5.8 3.9 2.1 1.6

Dat

a

Count 17 7 6 7 12 7Calculated t 0.070 2.756 0.700 1.671 0.118Degrees of Freedom 22 21 22 27 22Critical t 2.074 2.080 2.074 2.052 2.074t-

test

Significant? no yes no no no

Page 119: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

119

Experim

ental Results and D

iscussion

Table 5-6. Experiment 1 2-hour boil thickness swell (BTS) results and t-test determining the statistical significance between controlvalues and the five filler values.

Press Time(min) Control TC CTC L S BN

2.5 Average (%) 57.7 55.2 55.8 55.4 64.8 52.1

Std. Dev. 13.7 4.1 12.2 5.9 10.5 0.5

Dat

a

Count 9 5 5 6 6 2Calculated t 0.397 0.266 0.390 1.071 0.561Degrees of Freedom 12 12 13 13 9Critical t 2.179 2.179 2.16 2.16 2.262t-

test

Significant? no no no no no

4.0 Average (%) 41.4 37.6 38.0 40.7 43.5 36.4

Std. Dev. 6.2 4.9 3.6 3.3 2.8 4.2

Dat

a

Count 16 7 7 8 9 5Calculated t 1.408 1.348 0.298 0.958 1.671Degrees of Freedom 21 21 22 23 19Critical t 2.080 2.080 2.074 2.069 2.093t-te

st

Significant? no no no no no

5.5 Average (%) 36.8 36.4 32.2 39.8 41.1 35.0

Std. Dev. 5.8 4.2 4.6 1.8 4.1 6.4

Dat

a

Count 16 7 6 7 12 5Calculated t 0.180 1.734 1.320 2.163 0.584Degrees of Freedom 21 20 21 26 19Critical t 2.08 2.086 2.08 2.056 2.093t-

test

Significant? no no no yes no

Page 120: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

120

Chapter 5

considered statistically different. In other words, the mean IB value for the 4 minute TC is

statistically higher than the mean IB value for the 4 minute control (no filler).

If tcalculated

< tcritical

, then the control value and the filler value being tested are

statistically the same, and the result listed in the table is “no”. For example in Table 5-2,

compare the mean results of the 4 minute control (average = 306 kPa) to the 4 minute

CTC (average = 311 kPa), tcalculated

(0.199) < tcritical

(1.960), therefore the result in the table

is “no” and the values are considered statistically the same. In other words, the IB value

for the 4 minute CTC is statistically the same as the IB value for the 4 minute control.

As a reference for interpreting the results, typical values for IB, MOE, MOR, TS

for commercial OSB are listed below (“OSB Performance By Design”, 2000):

♦ IB = 345 kPa

♦ MOE = 3500 MPa (average of parallel and perpendicular)

♦ MOR = 21 MPa (average of parallel and perpendicular)

♦ TS = 10%

5.1.2 Vertical Density Profile Testing

Vertical density profile testing was done on several Experiment 1 boards. This

testing was done with a QMS Density Profiler by Lousiana Pacific Corp. Five to six, 51 x

51 mm waferboard samples were tested for each filler. The results showed that all

samples had the typical U-shaped density profile. A density profile summary of the six

control samples that were tested is shown in Figure 5-1.

Page 121: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

121

Experimental Results and Discussion

Figure 5-1. Density profile summary of the Experiment 1 control samples.

5.1.3 Initial Conclusions

In Experiment 1, three press times were used: 2.5, 4, and 5.5 minutes. The 2.5-

minute data is not presented in Table 5-2, since not enough samples were produced that

did not delaminate prior to testing. Hence, the 2.5-minute press time was too short to

produce a good board. IB results were successfully obtained for both the 4 and 5.5

minute press times. At the 4 minute press time, TC showed improved IB strength over

the control. At the 5.5 minute press time none of the fillers showed any difference from

the control, which could imply that all the boards were fully cured. If this was the case,

then any effect the fillers have on heat transfer would not be apparent.

SB testing, which was used to calculate MOE and MOR, was done to ensure that

the addition of fillers did not degrade the bending qualities of the board. Tables 5-3 and 5-

Page 122: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

122

Chapter 5

4 show several of the fillers significantly decreased bending properties (TC, L, and S at the

4 minute press time, TC at the 5.5 minute press time). The conclusion that was drawn

from Table 5-3 and 5-4 was that some of the fillers did result in significantly decreased

bending properties, but all results were within acceptable values for OSB.

The two thickness swell tests whose results are presented in Tables 5-5 and 5-6,

were conducted to determine if there was a decrease in thickness swell with the addition

of the fillers, which are much more hydrophobic than wood. Thickness swell of

commercial OSB is improved by the addition of 1 wt % or less, on an oven dried wood

weight basis, of wax. Wax was not used in waferboard manufacturing of this research so

as not to mask any effects the fillers may have on improving thickness swell. This resulted

in much higher thickness swell results of control boards (approximately 30 % or higher)

compared to commercial OSB (typically 10 %). The results showed that only CTC

significantly decreased thickness swell for the 4 and 5.5 minute press times for the 24-hour

soak test, but this improvement was not at the same level as wax provides. The S filler

showed significantly increased thickness swell at the 5.5 minute press time for the 2-hour

boil soak test.

To summarize the Experiment 1 conclusions:

♦ At the 4 minute press time, the TC filler showed improved IB strength

over the control.

♦ The 2.5-minute press time was too short, since most IB samples were of

such poor quality they delaminated before being tested.

♦ The 5.5 minute press time was determined to be too long, since none of

the fillers had any effect on the IB strength. This could imply that all

boards were fully cured, so that any effects the fillers have on heat

transfer would not be apparent.

♦ Some fillers did decrease the bending properties (MOE and MOR), but

all values were still within the typical acceptable values of commercial

OSB.

Page 123: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

123

Experimental Results and Discussion

♦ Only CTC decreased thickness swelling, but it did not compare to the

decrease in thickness swelling when wax is added, as in a typical OSB

manufacturing process.

5.1.4 Experiment 1 Concerns and Response

Upon review of our work from Experiment 1, several concerns and inconsistencies

were noted that may have adversely affected the results. Because of these concerns

changes were made to our experimental procedure to address the problems and additional

waferboard was manufactured in Experiment 2. These concerns are reviewed in detail

below, along with how each problem was addressed.

Day-to-Day Comparability

The main concern was the high variability of boards made on different days. The

results presented in Tables 5-2 to 5-6 are combined results from boards made on different

days throughout the summer. This concern is best illustrated by the IB data presented in

Table 5-7, which shows the average, standard deviation, and number of IB samples for

Experiment 1 control boards (those containing no filler) made at the 4 minute press time.

Table 5-7. IB Data from Experiment 1 for Control boards made with a 4 minute presstime.

DateAverage

(kPa)Std. Dev.

(kPa) Count4/5/2000 266 88 124/6/2000 313 43 4

5/22/2000 279 60 126/14/2000 297 102 46/16/2000 377 35 46/26/2000 530 62 46/29/2000 516 81 47/17/2000 307 118 47/20/2000 261 73 48/1/2000 229 65 48/4/2000 145 22 4

8/24/2000 287 32 4

Page 124: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

124

Chapter 5

Control boards were made on 12 different days between April and August of 2000.

Four IB’s were tested per board, and between one and three boards were made per day.

The average IB value ranged from a low of 145 kPa to a high of 530 kPa. This is a

difference of 385 kPa! This inconsistency in the control data makes it difficult to justify an

all-encompassing average that includes all control boards made during the summer of

2000, since by visual inspection the boards were not of the same quality. This also makes

it difficult to justify comparison between control boards and experimental boards

containing fillers made on different days, since it is impossible to determine if they were

made under identical conditions. There are many factors that can change from day to day,

especially over several months of work. For example, it is known that from April to

August of 2000 more than one batch of flakes from Louisiana Pacific, more than one lot

of PF resin from Borden Chemical, ambient conditions and strand moisture content varied,

and different people helped in the manufacturing process.

This problem was addressed in Experiment 2 by making each type of board

(control, and all 5 filler types) on a single day. By making the boards on the same day,

making sure the same person performs the same job all day, and by using the same

materials for all boards, many of the inconsistencies identified in Experiment 1 can be

eliminated.

High Internal Bond Standard Deviations

Again, using the data from Table 5-7, the standard deviation of the IB results for

each day varies considerably from 22 kPa to 118 kPa. The standard deviation was as high

as 39% of the average internal bond strength, making it difficult to perform any conclusive

statistical analysis on the results. The small number of samples tested per board (4)

contributed significantly to this problem, but it did allow for additional testing of other

physical properties.

Page 125: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

125

Experimental Results and Discussion

This problem was addressed in Experiment 2 by doing two things: increasing the

number of IB samples measured per board from 4 to 25 and focusing on one press time

instead of three.

Many different physical properties were tested in Experiment 1: IB, MOE, MOR,

24-hour thickness swell, and 2-hour boil thickness swell. Increasing the number of IB’s to

be measured does not allow enough material for additional physical properties testing.

Since it is commonly accepted in the wood industry that a higher internal bond indicates

better bonding, it was agreed that the most important property for this project is IB.

Therefore, all other tests were disregarded, leaving flexibility to test as many IB’s as

necessary to achieve our objective.

Focusing on one press time allows for more duplicate boards to be made, resulting

in more data points. In Experiment 1, three press times were used: 2.5, 4, and 5.5

minutes. The 2.5-minute press time was determined to be too short, since most samples

were of such poor quality they broke before being tested. Results were successfully

obtained for both the 4- and 5.5 minute press times, although at the 5.5 minute press time

there was not a noticeable difference between control boards and those with fillers. This

may indicate that the press time was too long to demonstrate any effects the thermally

conductive fillers may have on the heat transfer rate, since the entire board was fully

cured. Therefore, the 4 minute press time was chosen for Experiment 2 since it was the

shortest press time used that produced testable samples.

Delay Time Between Blending and Pressing

There was also a concern about the manufacturing process used in Experiment 1.

All strands to be used on a certain day were blended in the morning and stored in plastic

tubs until the afternoon. In the afternoon (approximately 3 hours after blending the first

batch) mats were formed and pressed. At issue was the waiting period between when the

strands were blended (sprayed with resin) and when the boards were finally pressed. It

Page 126: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

126

Chapter 5

was thought that the length of time might be long enough to allow some of the resin to

adsorb into the wood, which could adversely affect the ability of the resin to properly

bond to other strands. There was also a concern that the different batches of blended

strands may be in the plastic tubs for different lengths of time.

To eliminate the waiting period in Experiment 2, the manufacturing process was

streamlined by setting up an assembly line. One person blended strands, while another

formed mats, and a third person pressed the mats into boards. This process greatly

shortened the amount of time from when the strands were blended to when they were

pressed to approximately 20 minutes.

The process was further streamlined by eliminating several unnecessary steps

during mat forming. Instead of weighing out the amount of blended strands to make a

single mat, and then using these strands to form a mat, the mat was formed directly on a

scale. This reduced the number of times the strands had to be handled and in addition

made the entire process faster.

Size and Species Content of Commercial Strands

Since there was concern with all possible causes of variability, another issue was

the species content of the commercial strands used in Experiment 1. In the first

experiment darker strands, which likely were other, non-Aspen, species, were observed

when testing IB’s. The strands, which were donated by Louisiana Pacific (LP) Corp.’s

Sagola, Michigan plant, were approximately 89 wt % Aspen. The remaining strands were

approximately 4 wt % Basswood, 4 wt % White Birch, and 3 wt % Soft Maple. Such a

small sample of the LP flakes was used to make one board that it is possible to get a group

of strands that are predominately some species other than Aspen, which likely would have

different strength and bonding characteristics.

This issue was addressed in Experiment 2 by making pure Aspen flakes at MTU,

using a four and a half foot diameter disk flaker. Strandwood Molding of Dollar Bay,

Page 127: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

127

Experimental Results and Discussion

Michigan donated Aspen logs. A positive side effect of making these strands was that

they were smaller in size, but about the same thickness of 0.76 mm. The MTU strands

were about 25 mm wide by 50 mm long compared to the commercial strands which were

about 50 mm wide by 100 mm long. Smaller strands cause more consistent IB values,

since it was common during Experiment 1 for IB’s to break on a single, large strand that

covered the entire 51 mm square sample.

Unpredictability of Closing Time

One observation made while manufacturing boards during Experiment 1 was that

the press closing time varied widely from day to day. Another reason control boards made

in Experiment 1 are different may be the variation in closing time, which is the time it

takes for the press to reach the stops. The stops are metal plates used to prevent the press

from closing farther than the desired thickness of the board. Figure 5-2 illustrates the

waferboard pressing cycle.

Figure 5-2. Illustration of the waferboard pressing cycle and the relationship betweenpress closing time, press time, and total press time.

In Experiment 1, press time was measured from the time the press reached the

stops (time = 0) to the end of the pressing, and was independent of the closing time. Since

our press is manually operated, control over how fast the press closes was limited to the

maximum hydraulic pressure available to the press. This caused considerable variation in

Page 128: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

128

Chapter 5

the total time in the press. The variation in closing time for the 4 minute press time

boards is shown in Table 5-8.

Table 5-8. Minimum, maximum, and average closing times for all 4 minute boards madein Experiment 1.

Closing Time (min:sec)Minimum 0:36Maximum 1:31Average 1:01

The difference between the maximum and minimum closing time is 55 seconds,

which means that some boards may have been in the press for almost a minute longer than

others before the timer even started to count the pressing time. The total press time

ranged from 4:36 (min:sec) to 5:31 for the 4 minute boards.

Using the data in the table above for the 4 minute boards, the closing time varied

from 13% of the total press time to 28% of the total press time. This is a 15% change in

the total press time or the total time that the board was in the press, which would likely

affect the board IB values.

To correct for this in Experiment 2, it was decided to specify a total pressing time,

which would combine the press closing time and press time after hitting the stops. Since

the average closing time was just over a minute, a minute was allowed for the press

closing. This would make the total press time for the 4 minute board done in Experiment

1 to now be 5 minutes for Experiment 2. Even though the closing time was now included

in the total press time for Experiment 2, the closing time was still recorded for each

individual board.

Strand Moisture Content

The last concern addressed was the effect of different moisture amounts in the

strands. Since moisture content affects the final quality of the board, a target moisture

Page 129: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

129

Experimental Results and Discussion

value was chosen to be 5 wt % and water was added to the strands during blending to

bring the total moisture content up to this value. This change helps to eliminate day-to-

day variation, but does not affect boards that were made on the same day since all boards

were made with identical materials (i.e. strands with relatively the same moisture content).

The importance of moisture content on heat transfer is described in Section 2.3.2.

Additional Experiment 2 Changes

Several other changes were made in Experiment 2 in an attempt to improve our

manufacturing process but not in response to any particular concern.

Smaller Boards. Smaller boards were made to conserve material since less

waferboard was needed for testing. In Experiment 1, 457 x 457-mm boards were made.

In Experiment 2, 406 x 406-mm boards were made.

Length of Conditioning Time. The conditioning time was shorted from about 6

weeks for Experiment 1 to about 3 weeks for Experiment 2. Boards were still stored in

the conditioning room until testing, but reaching equilibrium moisture content (EMC) was

not as closely monitored. This was felt to be sufficient since conditioning does not have a

significant effect on IB results. The equilibrium moisture content of all boards tested was

approximately 6 wt %, dry basis, regardless of if the boards were conditioned for 3 weeks

or 6 weeks.

Sample Location. A cutting diagram was used with sample numbers indicating a

specific location on the board. It was felt that this might be important information for

analyzing the IB results. This diagram is discussed in detail in Section 5.2.2.

5.2 Experiment 2 Results: Summer 2001 Waferboard

Manufacturing, 5 minute press time

Experiment 2 results include several observations made during manufacturing, and

a qualitative analysis of IB dependence on sample location and density, which is described

Page 130: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

130

Chapter 5

Section 5.2.2. Several 2-way analysis of variances (ANOVA) were used to determine IB

dependence upon sample location, board, day made, and filler.

Experiment 2 was performed in two parts. The first part was three days of boards

made on April 19th, April 26th, and May 3rd, 2001. After analysis of the data, two more

days of data were added to Experiment 2. The additional boards were pressed on July 2nd

and July 3rd, 2001. The discussion of results is broken into these two parts.

5.2.1 Observations

Two observations were made during manufacturing of the boards for Experiment

2. The first observation was that the closing time was about 30 seconds faster than

anticipated. With the Experiment 1 457 x 457-mm boards, the average closing time was

about 1 minute. With the Experiment 2 406 x 406-mm boards, the average closing time

was about 30 seconds. This change was likely due to the smaller boards containing less

material, which makes closing the press at the maximum hydraulic pressure, faster.

The second observation is that on average, all boards that contain fillers had a 3 to

4 second faster closing time. There are several possible explanations. The first is that the

fillers may have a positive effect on the ability of the mat to compress during press closing.

The fillers may be acting as a lubricant to aid the consolidation of the mat. The second

explanation is that this is due to the slightly fewer strands in the filler boards than the

control boards. Different amounts of strands are used so that both filler and control

boards have the same target density (0.641 g/cm3) after pressing.

5.2.2 Analysis of the First Three Days of Data

The first three days worth of boards were made on April 19th, April 26th, and May

3rd, 2001. The section below discusses how the original data was analyzed and why two

more days of manufacturing were added to Experiment 2.

Page 131: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

131

Experimental Results and Discussion

Distributions

The first analysis done on the test results was to sketch each board and observe

how IB and density changed with position. Figure 5-3 shows the actual layout with

respect to IB and density values for each sample from board C2-C-B4, which is a control

board made on Day 1 of Experiment 2. In the top part of the figure, the IB value is shown

in each location. In the lower part of the figure, the density is shown in each location.

Each value was color coded as “low”, “average”, and “high”, and trends dependent on

location were qualitatively observed.

This type of analysis was performed to familiarize ourselves with the data. Ideally

IB values should be independent of location, and the density should be uniform

throughout the board at the target density (0.641 g/cm3). Individual test results for

Experiment 2 are in Appendix D.

It is generally accepted that IB strength is dependent upon density (Kelly, 1977).

After studying the charts like that shown in Figure 5-3 and plotting the density verses IB

strength for each board made, it was concluded that IB dependence upon density is

negligible since density was fairly uniform throughout the board. Position was observed

to be a more important factor. The edge samples had consistently lower IB’s, which may

be due to edge effects that occur during the pressing process. Sample number 20, which

is located in the lower left corner of the board, best illustrates this since it was the lowest

IB value on a majority of the boards. To help eliminate the edge effects and IB

dependence on position, the edge samples were discarded and only the 12 center samples

were analyzed (samples 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 10, 11, 12, 15, 16, 17, 18, 21, 22, 23, 24), as shown

in Figure 5-4. The “M” sample shown in Figure 5-4 was used to measure the moisture

content of the board.

Page 132: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

132

Chapter 5

Board Name: C2-C-B4

Manufactured: 4/19/2001

IB Distribution

IB Strengths (kPa)

221 under 172

232 260 409 385 278 245 172 - 310

255 311 246 335 348 220 over 310

133 239 306 284 372 292

25 151 139 285 251 240

Density Distribution

Density (g/cm3)

0.626 under 0.625

0.594 0.578 0.649 0.718 0.660 0.630 0.625 - 0.657

0.633 0.654 0.642 0.665 0.674 0.622 over 0.657

0.602 0.633 0.702 0.714 0.711 0.639

0.546 0.634 0.641 0.694 0.697 0.674

Figure 5-3. Distribution of IB and Density within board C2-C-B4.

Page 133: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

133

Experimental Results and Discussion

Figure 5-4. Center samples used in Experiment 2 data analysis.

5.2.3 Summary of Testing Results

Now using only the center 12 IB samples, results for all three days were compiled.

A summary of the first three days of Experiment 2 IB data is shown in Table 5-9. The

starred (*) board was pressed 1 minute and 40 seconds too long, so no data was obtained.

Page 134: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

134

Chapter 5

Day Board C TC CTC L S BNMean 314 275 338 325 317

1 1 Std. Dev. 56 60 * 47 62 66 Count 12 12 12 12 12

Mean 320 301 309 347 255 3011 2 Std. Dev. 41 47 52 38 63 57 Count 12 12 12 12 12 12

Mean 286 369 286 285 248 2961 3 Std. Dev. 37 40 53 33 60 55 Count 12 12 12 12 12 12

Mean 307 315 297 323 276 3051 All Std. Dev. 46 63 53 48 69 58

Count 36 36 24 36 36 36Mean 301 304 342 302 278 327

2 1 Std. Dev. 45 68 47 80 36 30 Count 12 12 12 12 12 12

Mean 301 254 307 321 280 2672 2 Std. Dev. 68 61 71 56 57 59 Count 12 12 12 12 12 12

Mean 282 286 304 281 256 3102 3 Std. Dev. 34 33 48 59 57 50 Count 12 12 12 12 12 12

Mean 295 281 318 301 271 3022 All Std. Dev. 50 58 58 66 50 53 Count 36 36 36 36 36 36

Mean 302 294 358 310 326 3183 1 Std. Dev. 40 36 44 36 67 56 Count 12 12 12 12 12 12

Mean 320 323 349 363 287 3173 2 Std. Dev. 38 53 41 33 66 40 Count 12 12 12 12 12 12

Mean 285 292 365 355 307 3433 3 Std. Dev. 50 51 48 48 63 45 Count 12 12 12 12 12 12

Mean 303 303 357 342 307 3263 All Std. Dev. 44 48 43 45 65 48

Count 36 36 36 36 36 36

Table 5-9. Summary of the first three days of Experiment 2 IB data (kPa), containingcenter 12 IB samples.

Page 135: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

135

Experimental Results and Discussion

A quick glance at the data shows that there are not many differences between

experimental boards and control boards on Day 1 and Day 2, although on Day 3 some of

the fillers appear to have given different results. These comparisons were done

analytically using analysis of variance, discussed later in this section.

Standard Deviation Comparisons

To determine if our changes did reduce IB variability, the standard deviations for

control boards in Experiment 1 and 2 were compared. Tables 5-10 and 5-11 show the

control IB results for both experiments. The last column of each table is a calculation of

the standard deviation as a percent of the average. At the bottom of the column is the

average for this value.

Table 5-10. IB results (kPa) from Experiment 1, 4 minute control boards, showing therelative size of the standard deviation as a percent of the average.

Name Date Average Std. Dev. Count% of

AverageC-C-B1 4/5/2000 272 54 4 20%C-C-B2 4/5/2000 288 82 4 28%C-C-B3 4/5/2000 237 131 4 55%C-C-B4 4/6/2000 313 43 4 14%C-C-B5 5/22/2000 284 43 4 15%C-C-B6 5/22/2000 321 70 4 22%C-C-B7 5/22/2000 232 31 4 13%C-C-B8 6/14/2000 297 102 4 34%C-C-B9 6/16/2000 377 35 4 9%C-C-B10 6/26/2000 530 62 4 12%C-C-B11 6/29/2000 516 81 4 16%C-C-B12 7/17/2000 307 118 4 39%C-C-B13 7/20/2000 261 73 4 28%C-C-B14 8/1/2000 229 65 4 29%C-C-B15 8/4/2000 145 22 4 15%C-C-B16 8/24/2000 287 32 4 11%

Average: 22%

Page 136: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

136

Chapter 5

Table 5-11. IB results (kPa) from Experiment 2 Control boards, showing the relative sizeof the standard deviation as a percent of the average.

Name Date Average Std. Dev. Count% of

AverageC2-C-B4 4/19/2001 314 56 12 18%C2-C-B5 4/19/2001 320 41 12 13%C2-C-B6 4/19/2001 286 37 12 13%C2-C-B7 4/26/2001 301 45 12 15%C2-C-B8 4/26/2001 301 68 12 23%C2-C-B9 4/26/2001 282 34 12 12%C2-C-B10 5/3/2001 302 40 12 13%C2-C-B11 5/3/2001 320 38 12 12%C2-C-B12 5/3/2001 285 50 12 18%

Average: 15%

In Experiment 1, the control boards’ standard deviations were, on average, 22% of

the average. This was significantly improved in Experiment 2, where this value dropped

to 15% of the average. This data proves that our manufacturing changes did reduce IB

variability.

Analysis of Variance

Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to analyze the Experiment 2 IB data and

to quantitatively describe sample-to-sample variation within a single board, day-to-day

variation of boards made, and, most importantly, differences in mean IB values from filler-

to-filler.

MinitabTM statistical software, was used for the analysis, which is described in

Section 4.4.2. In this analysis of IB values, the 95 % confidence interval (CI) was used.

If the P-value, or probability, was less than 0.05 then the IB values being compared were

significantly different from each other. Minitab results also included several charts

summarizing mean IB values and CI for the factors being studied. If the CI’s overlap one

another, then the categories of each factor are considered the same. If the CI’s do not

Page 137: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

137

Experimental Results and Discussion

overlap each other, then the categories are considered significantly different at the 95%

confidence level.

Sample - Board ANOVA

To quantitatively analyze the sample-to-sample variation within a single board,

control boards from one day were studied. The ANOVA analysis of the three control

boards made on Day 1 is shown in Figure 5-5. Comparing the P-value with 0.05 for

“SampleNu” (P = 0.358 > 0.050) and “Board” (P = 0.156 > 0.050), show that IB values

are not dependent upon location within the board. “SampleNu” is the category that

represents each individual sample and “Board” represents the three different boards made

on Day 1.

These results were expected since the edge samples were not included in the

analysis in hopes of removing any IB dependences upon location, and since it shows that

the three control boards made on Day 1 are statistically the same. Similar results were

obtained for the control boards made on Day 2 and Day 3 of Experiment 2.

Day - Filler ANOVA

Because the sample-board ANOVA showed that the center 12 IB values were not

dependent on location, the center 12 IB values for each board were average to get a single

IB value for that board. Each board was then considered a replicate and a 2-way ANOVA

was done to compare the day-filler results. The results of this ANOVA using the first 3

days of data is shown in Figure 5-6.

Figure 5-6 shows that the day the boards were made had a significant effect, since

the “Day” P-value (P = 0.002 < 0.050) is less than 0.05. The top chart shows that the first

two days the IB values were essentially the same, but on the third day the mean IB values

were higher.

Page 138: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

138

Chapter 5

Two-way ANOVA: IB versus SampleNumber, Board

Analysis of Variance for IBSource DF SS MS F PSampleNu 11 24928 2266 1.17 0.358Board 2 7807 3903 2.02 0.156Error 22 42431 1929Total 35 75166

Individual 95% CISampleNu Mean --------+---------+---------+---------+--- 3 271 (---------*----------) 4 339 (----------*---------) 5 351 (---------*----------) 6 308 (----------*---------) 9 307 (---------*----------)10 281 (---------*----------)11 315 (----------*---------)12 308 (----------*---------)15 267 (---------*----------)16 297 (---------*----------)17 292 (---------*----------)18 344 (----------*---------) --------+---------+---------+---------+--- 250 300 350 400

Individual 95% CIBoard Mean -------+---------+---------+---------+----1 314 (----------*---------)2 320 (----------*---------)3 286 (---------*----------) -------+---------+---------+---------+---- 275 300 325 350

Figure 5-5. MinitabTM ANOVA output for Experiment 2 sample-to-sample variance ofDay 1 control boards IB data (kPa).

Page 139: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

139

Experimental Results and Discussion

Results for: Days 1,2 and 3

Two-way ANOVA: Average IB versus Day, Filler

Analysis of Variance for AverageSource DF SS MS F PDay 2 8468 4234 7.43 0.002Filler 5 9032 1806 3.17 0.018Interaction 10 5617 562 0.99 0.473Error 36 20513 570Total 53 43629

Individual 95% CIDay Mean ---+---------+---------+---------+--------1 303.8 (-------*------)2 292.6 (-------*-------)3 322.9 (------*-------) ---+---------+---------+---------+-------- 285.0 300.0 315.0 330.0

Individual 95% CIFiller Mean ------+---------+---------+---------+-----C 301.2 (-------*-------)TC 299.8 (-------*-------)CTC 320.0 (-------*-------)L 322.4 (-------*-------)S 284.7 (-------*-------)BN 310.7 (-------*-------) ------+---------+---------+---------+----- 280.0 300.0 320.0 340.0

Figure 5-6. MinitabTM ANOVA output for Experiment 2 day-filler analysis of the firstthree days of IB data (kPa).

Page 140: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

140

Chapter 5

So what happened on the third day? It is suspected that higher IB values were

obtained on Day 3 because a fresh pail of resin was used. The resin was received the same

day and was from the same lot as the other resin, but was just opened. It appears the

freshness of the resin has a significant effect on the effectiveness of the fillers, since resole

PF resin cures over time at ambient conditions.

The second part of this analysis looks at the filler effect. In this case the “Filler” P-

value (P = 0.018 < 0.050) is less than 0.05 indicating that the fillers do have a statistically

significant effect on the IB values. To get an idea of what kind of effect, look the bottom

chart in Figure 5-5. By comparing the CI’s and observing which CI’s overlap each other,

it was concluded that:

♦ CTC and L boards have statistically higher IB values than S boards.

♦ None of the fillers have statistically different IB values when compared

to controls.

♦ CTC and L boards may show a trend towards higher IB values than

control, but results are not statistically significant.

An interaction term was not significant in this analysis (P = 0.473 > 0.050). This

states that there is no significant interaction between the effect of the fillers on mean IB

and the day on which the waferboard is made. It is also important to note that the day

effect is more important than the filler effect (Fday

= 7.43 > 3.17 = Ffiller

).

Day - Filler ANOVA Using Only Day 1 and Day 2 Data

To illustrate the importance of the Day 3 data, another Day-Filler ANOVA using

only Day 1 and Day 2 IB data was performed. The results of this analysis are shown in

Figure 5-7.

This analysis illustrates that without the Day 3 IB data, there is no significant day

(P = 0.209 > 0.050) or filler (P = 0.232 > 0.050) effect on IB values. The day result

demonstrates how important and different the Day 3 IB data is. Without the Day 3 data

Page 141: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

141

Experimental Results and Discussion

Results for: Days 1 and 2

Two-way ANOVA: Average IB versus Day, Filler

Analysis of Variance for AverageSource DF SS MS F PDay 1 1133 1133 1.66 0.209Filler 5 5050 1010 1.48 0.232Interaction 5 1662 332 0.49 0.782Error 24 16343 681Total 35 24188

Individual 95% CIDay Mean -+---------+---------+---------+---------+1 303.8 (------------*------------)2 292.6 (------------*-----------) -+---------+---------+---------+---------+ 280.0 290.0 300.0 310.0 320.0

Individual 95% CIFiller Mean -----+---------+---------+---------+------C 301 (----------*----------)TC 298 (----------*----------)CTC 302 (----------*----------)L 312 (----------*---------)S 274 (----------*----------)BN 303 (----------*---------) -----+---------+---------+---------+------ 260 280 300 320

Figure 5-7. Minitab ANOVA output for Experiment 2 day-to-day variance using onlyDay 1 and Day 2 IB data (kPa).

Page 142: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

142

Chapter 5

there is no “day” effect and no filler improves the IB values. If the reason for this

difference was the freshness of the resin as believed, then this could be very valuable

information for the success of future laboratory and commercial trials.

The conclusion that the fillers do not have an effect on IB values is further

supported since the confidence intervals of all of the fillers in the lower chart overlap each

other. The most important point to bring up here is that the first two days of data shows

no difference between control boards and CTC and L boards. Therefore, for Experiment

2 Day 1 and 2 IB data, none of the fillers improved IB when compared to control boards,

and that all of the fillers were statistically the same.

The interaction term is still not significant when only the first two days are

considered (P = 0.782 > 0.050). This suggests that there is no interaction between effects

of the fillers and the day on which the waferboard was made.

5.2.3 Analysis Including the Last Three Days of Data

The preliminary results from Experiment 2 were inconsistent with those obtained

in Experiment 1. The Experiment 2 IB results were more consistent due to the changes in

the manufacturing process and an increased number of IB samples, which resulted in

lower standard deviations.

Because of concerns about the freshness of the resin used on Day 1 and Day 2 of

Experiment 2, two more days of pressing were added. We received new resin to use on

these additional days, and the new boards were pressed on July 2nd and July 3rd, 2001.

To save time on testing, only the center 12 IB samples were tested. The new

waferboard test results were expected to duplicate those obtained on Day 3 of Experiment

2, when fresh resin was used.

Page 143: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

143

Experimental Results and Discussion

Summary of Test Results

Table 5-12 shows the additional two days of data pressed on July 2nd and July 3rd,

2001. The new results show some differences between boards.

Table 5-12. Summary of IB data (kPa) from Day 4 and Day 5 of Experiment 2.

Day Board C TC CTC L S BNMean 343 338 407 436 398 433

4 1 Std. Dev. 71 44 76 45 43 85 Count 12 12 12 12 12 12

Mean 364 334 383 385 395 4074 2 Std. Dev. 48 35 58 53 49 49 Count 12 12 12 12 12 12

Mean 349 290 395 391 378 4294 3 Std. Dev. 66 47 81 44 79 61 Count 12 12 12 12 12 12

Mean 352 320 395 404 390 4234 All Std. Dev. 61 47 71 51 58 66

Count 36 36 36 36 36 36Mean 346 368 339 376 400 419

5 1 Std. Dev. 69 85 87 76 71 75 Count 12 12 12 12 12 12

Mean 426 376 434 412 372 4015 2 Std. Dev. 71 54 32 64 63 74 Count 12 12 12 12 12 12

Mean 399 358 375 363 348 4265 3 Std. Dev. 55 61 58 91 74 52 Count 12 12 12 12 12 12

Mean 390 367 383 384 373 4155 All Std. Dev. 72 67 73 78 71 67

Count 36 36 36 36 36 36

Page 144: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

144

Chapter 5

ANOVA Using All 5 Days of Data

The same two-way ANOVA (day-filler) was performed using all five days of IB

data. The MinitabTM output is shown in Figure 5-8.

Figure 5-8 shows that the day still has a significant effect since the “Day” P-value

is less than 0.05 (P = 0.000 < 0.050). This really isn’t any surprise, and the effect of the

new resin is quite obvious. The average IB value of Day 3 is higher than that of Day 1

and 2, and the average IB values of Day 4 and 5 are tremendously different than even Day

3, all presumably due to resin freshness.

The same analysis also shows that there is a significant filler effect (P = 0.000 <

0.050). The CI’s of each filler shown in the lower chart indicate that the fillers can be

grouped into two categories. The first group consists of S and TC fillers, which did not

change the IB values when compared to the control. The second group consists of BN,

CTC, and L fillers, which resulted in improved IB results when compared to the control.

A significant day-filler interaction is shown (P = 0.026 < 0.050). The interaction

term is reasonable since the effect of the fillers varied considerably depending on the day

the waferboard was made. The analysis of the first two days of data indicated that none of

the fillers had any effect on the IB values, when compared to controls, while waferboard

made using fresh resin did show some of the fillers to have an effect on IB values.

ANOVA Using Only The Last 3 Days of Data

An additional two-way, day-filler ANOVA was performed using only the last 3

days of IB data, which were all the days when fresher resin was used during waferboard

manufacturing. The goal was to determine if the results changed any with just the fresh

resin data. Figure 5-9 shows the results of this analysis.

The day and filler effects were still significant (P = 0.000 < 0.050) but the

magnitude of the effects changed slightly. The day effect decreased (F3day

=51.13 < 64.72

= F5day

), and the filler effect increased (F3day

= 10.21 > 7.16 = F5day

) but the day effect was

Page 145: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

145

Experimental Results and Discussion

Two-way ANOVA: Average IB versus Day, Filler

Analysis of Variance for AverageSource DF SS MS F PDay 4 140688 35172 64.72 0.000Filler 5 19454 3891 7.16 0.000Interaction 20 20998 1050 1.93 0.026Error 60 32608 543Total 89 213748

Individual 95% CIDay Mean -------+---------+---------+---------+----1 303.8 (--*---)2 292.6 (---*--)3 322.9 (---*--)4 379.8 (---*--)5 389.1 (---*--) -------+---------+---------+---------+---- 300.0 330.0 360.0 390.0

Individual 95% CIFiller Mean -------+---------+---------+---------+----C 329.2 (-------*-------)TC 317.5 (-------*-------)CTC 350.7 (-------*-------)L 351.0 (-------*-------)S 323.5 (-------*-------)BN 354.1 (-------*-------) -------+---------+---------+---------+---- 315.0 330.0 345.0 360.0

Figure 5-8. Board-filler MinitabTM ANOVA analysis of Experiment 2 using all five daysof IB data (kPa).

Page 146: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

146

Chapter 5

Results for: Days 3, 4 and 5

Two-way ANOVA: Average IB versus Day, Filler

Analysis of Variance for AverageSource DF SS MS F PDay 2 46203 23101 51.13 0.000Filler 5 23054 4611 10.21 0.000Interaction 10 10686 1069 2.37 0.029Error 36 16265 452Total 53 96208

Individual 95% CIDay Mean -----+---------+---------+---------+------3 322.9 (---*---)4 379.8 (---*---)5 389.1 (---*---) -----+---------+---------+---------+------ 325.0 350.0 375.0 400.0

Individual 95% CIFiller Mean ----+---------+---------+---------+-------C 348.2 (----*-----)TC 330.3 (-----*-----)CTC 383.6 (----*-----)L 376.8 (-----*----)S 356.8 (-----*----)BN 388.1 (-----*-----) ----+---------+---------+---------+------- 325.0 350.0 375.0 400.0

Figure 5-9. Board-filler MinitabTM ANOVA analysis of Experiment 2 using last three daysof IB data (kPa).

Page 147: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

147

Experimental Results and Discussion

still more significant than the filler effect. The day-filler interaction was also still

significant (P = 0.029 < 0.050). The magnitude of the mean filler IB values also increased

without the first two days of data which had low daily mean IB values.

The CI’s show that the same two groupings are present with, TC and S not

affecting IB values when compared to the control, and CTC, L and BN improving IB

values when compared to the control.

5.2.4 Experiment 2 Conclusions

The following observations and conclusions were made from Experiment 2:

♦ The press closing time for boards containing fillers was 3 to 4 seconds

shorter than control boards.

♦ For data analysis, only use IB samples from the center of the board to

minimize edge effects and eliminate IB dependence on location.

♦ The freshness of the resin appears to have a significant affect on the

effectiveness of the fillers.

♦ The fillers can be put into two groups: those that improve IB strength

(CTC, L, and BN) and those that do not change IB strength (TC and

S), when compared to controls. Waferboard containing CTC, L, and

BN fillers showed higher IB values when compared to waferboard not

containing any filler.

It is unclear as to whether the increase in IB is the result of just adding fillers as

demonstrated by other researchers (see Section 2.5.1) or if the increase in IB was due to

the thermal conductivity of the fillers. Direct measure of the heat transfer within the mat

during pressing may be the best test of this theory.

Also, why some of the fillers worked and others didn’t is somewhat puzzling, since

all fillers are highly thermally conductive. The natural graphite (S) filler has a much higher

ash content than the other fillers which are all man-made. The TC and S fillers have a

Page 148: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

148

Chapter 5

smaller particle size than either CTC or L. CTC and L are similar materials close to the

same particle size. Particle size can’t be the entire reason though, since the BN filler was

effective, but had the smallest particle size of all the fillers. The BN filler may bond better

with the PF resin, although it is highly unlikely that the BN filler would ever be an

economical choice because of its high cost. Future work into the adhesion and surface

energy of the fillers and resin may be insightful.

5.3 Experiment 3 Results: Summer 2001 OSB

Manufacturing, 4.5 minute press time

Because the closing time was 30 seconds shorter in Experiment 2 than expected

(30 seconds in Experiment 2 instead of 1 minute as in Experiment 1), an additional three

days of boards were pressed at a total press time of 4 minutes and 30 seconds on July 9th,

11th, and 13th, 2001. The new total press time was 30 seconds shorter to ensure that too

long of a press time was not used in Experiment 2. This new set of data was named

Experiment 3.

5.3.1 Results and Data Analysis

Table 5-13 summarizes the IB results from Experiment 3. Again, only the center

12 IB samples were tested to minimize edge effects. The results are summarized in Table

5-13. Individual moisture and IB results for Experiment 3 are in Appendix E.

A two-way, day-filler ANOVA were performed on Experiment 3 IB data, and is

shown in Figure 5-10. This clearly illustrates that there is no day effect since the “Day” P-

value is much greater than 0.05 (P = 0.997 > 0.050). This is consistent with the fact that

the same resin was used for all three days and they were pressed only four days apart.

Therefore conditions were similar for each day waferboard was made in Experiment 3.

Page 149: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

149

Experimental Results and Discussion

Table 5-13. Summary of Experiment 3 IB results (kPa).

Day Board C TC CTC L S BNMean 318 280 378 354 257 264

1 1 Std. Dev. 60 68 77 67 65 62 Count 12 12 12 12 12 12

Mean 338 349 295 363 249 2971 2 Std. Dev. 39 60 107 76 70 82 Count 12 12 12 12 12 12

Mean 316 247 331 294 252 3071 3 Std. Dev. 41 62 67 59 52 59 Count 12 12 12 12 12 12

Mean 324 292 335 337 253 2891 All Std. Dev. 48 75 90 73 61 69

Count 36 36 36 36 36 36Mean 348 278 341 340 280 332

2 1 Std. Dev. 67 78 81 82 69 55 Count 12 12 12 12 12 12

Mean 316 235 340 369 290 3072 2 Std. Dev. 75 71 70 97 63 58 Count 12 12 12 12 12 12

Mean 234 278 283 354 240 2962 3 Std. Dev. 91 91 74 91 109 66 Count 12 12 12 12 12 12

Mean 300 264 321 354 270 3122 All Std. Dev. 90 81 78 88 83 60 Count 36 36 36 36 36 36

Mean 314 321 330 312 238 2803 1 Std. Dev. 71 73 76 92 92 65 Count 12 12 12 12 12 12

Mean 319 293 313 281 308 3133 2 Std. Dev. 64 90 48 89 90 81 Count 12 12 12 12 12 12

Mean 327 339 319 294 228 3053 3 Std. Dev. 54 90 62 74 73 94 Count 12 12 12 12 12 12

Mean 320 318 321 296 258 2993 All Std. Dev. 62 85 62 84 90 80

Count 36 36 36 36 36 36

Page 150: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

150

Chapter 5

Two-way ANOVA: Average IB versus Day, Filler

Analysis of Variance for AverageSource DF SS MS F PDay 2 4 2 0.00 0.997Filler 5 25945 5189 6.54 0.000Interaction 10 12129 1213 1.53 0.169Error 36 28551 793Total 53 66629

Individual 95% CIDay Mean ----------+---------+---------+---------+-1 301.3 (------------------*-------------------)2 301.8 (------------------*------------------)3 301.1 (------------------*------------------) ----------+---------+---------+---------+- 294.0 301.0 308.0 315.0

Individual 95% CIFiller Mean ----------+---------+---------+---------+-C 314.4 (------*-----)TC 291.1 (-----*-----)CTC 313.6 (------*-----)L 329.0 (------*-----)S 260.2 (------*-----)BN 300.1 (-----*-----) ----------+---------+---------+---------+- 270.0 300.0 330.0 360.0

Figure 5-10. Day-filler MinitabTM ANOVA analysis of Experiment 3 IB results (kPa).

Page 151: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

151

Experimental Results and Discussion

The filler analysis shows that the effect is significant (P = 0.000 < 0.050). The

following conclusions about the fillers were made from studying the CI’s:

♦ There is not much difference between control boards and TC, CTC, L,

and BN fillers. They are all statistically the same.

♦ S has significantly lower IB results than control.

Most importantly, none of the fillers showed significantly improved IB values when

compared to the control in Experiment 3. Also, the S filler actually showed decreased IB

values when compared to the control. There was also no significant day-filler interaction

(P = 0.169 > 0.050).

Standard Deviation Analysis

So why doesn’t Experiment 3 give the same results as Experiment 2? One clue is

found when standard deviations between the two experiments are compared. The table

below shows the standard deviations of Experiment 3 control boards. The last column is a

measure of the size of the standard deviation as percent of the average.

Table 5-14. Summary of control IB data for Experiment 3 (kPa).

Name Date Average Std. Dev. Count% of

AverageC2-C-A1 7/9/2001 318 60 12 19%C2-C-A2 7/9/2001 337 40 12 12%C2-C-A3 7/9/2001 316 41 12 13%C2-C-A4 7/11/2001 348 67 12 19%C2-C-A5 7/11/2001 316 75 12 24%C2-C-A6 7/11/2001 234 92 12 39%C2-C-A7 7/13/2001 314 71 12 23%C2-C-A8 7/13/2001 319 64 12 20%C2-C-A9 7/13/2001 327 54 12 16%

Average: 21%

Page 152: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

152

Chapter 5

Table 5-14 shows the standard deviation as a percent of the average was 21% for

Experiment 3. This is much worse than the 15% we obtained in Experiment 2, and is just

about the same value as for Experiment 1 (22%). This may show that the press time (4.5

minutes) was too short to produce consistent boards, which resulted in the higher standard

deviations. The standard deviations of the Experiment 2 boards proved that changes made

to the experimental procedure achieved the objective of making more consistent boards.

Since the only change with Experiment 3 was the length of the total press time, then it

could be concluded that the 4.5 minute total press time was too short to allow for

adequate curing of the resin in the core of the waferboard. Inadequate resin curing in the

core of the waferboard could explain why no fillers improved the IB value when compared

to the control. This possibly indicates that the addition of the thermally conductive fillers

does not speed the heat transfer into the core by more than 30 seconds.

5.3.2 Experiment 3 Conclusions

The conclusions drawn from Experiment 3 IB data were:

♦ The 4.5 minute press time is too short to obtain consistent boards.

♦ None of the fillers improve IB when compared to the control.

♦ S showed lower IB values when compared to the control.

5.4 Temperature Profiles

The internal mat temperature, midway through the board thickness, was

measured during pressing. This experiment was done on November 7th, 2000. Boards

were made using Experiment 1 methods and materials, including LP strands.

Only six boards were tested: two each of control, 1 wt % TC, and 0.5 wt % TC.

The results were compiled by averaging all thermocouple readings made on each board

type (see Section 4.2.8). The results of the experiment are shown in Figures 5-11 and 5-

12.

Page 153: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

153

Experimental Results and Discussion

0.0

25.0

50.0

75.0

100.0

125.0

150.0

175.0

200.0

225.0

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200

Time (s)

Tem

pera

ture

(C

)

Control1% TC0.5% TC

Figure 5-11. Internal temperature profile of control boards and TC boards duringpressing.

From the results it is clear that there is no distinguishable difference between

control boards and those containing TC fillers. If an effect was to be seen, it was expected

that the boards containing fillers would have a faster temperature rise than the control

boards.

This temperature profile matches the results obtained in Experiment 2, that the TC

filler has no significant effect on heat transfer during waferboard pressing at the 1 wt %

loading level. Considering the Experiment 2 results and improvements made to the

manufacturing process, it may be beneficial to perform this experiment again, using

Experiment 2 methods and materials and a filler that showed improved IB strength (CTC,

L, or BN). Automating the data acquisition system would also improve the consistency of

the temperature readings.

Page 154: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

154

Chapter 5

0.0

25.0

50.0

75.0

100.0

125.0

150.0

40 90 140 190 240

Time (s)

Tem

pera

ture

(C

)

Control1% TC0.5% TC

Figure 5-12. Close up of fast temperature rise of internal temperature profile of controlboards and TC boards during pressing.

5.5 Viscosity

The viscosity of the resin and resin/filler systems was measured to determine how

the fillers affected the viscosity of the resin. This would be important for commercial

application of adding fillers in liquid PF resin. A mixture that has too high of a viscosity

may be difficult to pump. The result presented in Figure 5-13 is the average of three

separate readings taken on a single sample (see Section 4.3.1).

Page 155: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

155

Experimental Results and Discussion

0.0

500.0

1000.0

1500.0

2000.0

2500.0

3000.0

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 1.25

Loading (g Filler/4 g wet resin)

Vis

cosi

ty (

cP) TC

CTCLSBN

Figure 5-13. Change in viscosity of PF resin with the addition of the thermally conductivefillers.

The results show that BN increases the viscosity the most at a loading of 1 g filler/

4 g of wet resin. The wet resin was 57 % solids. Waferboard manufactured for this

project contained 1 g filler/4 g of resin solids, which is equivalent to 0.57 g filler/g wet

resin and is in-between the data points collected.

The viscosity tended to increase more with smaller particles, with the exception of

the L filler. L has a smaller mean particle size than CTC, but changed the viscosity less

than CTC at the highest loading. Particle shape may also be a factor, since L has much

smoother edges than CTC and a smaller mean aspect ratio (see SEM micrographs in

Section 3.3.4). The BN filler has a much higher surface area than the other fillers, which

may have contributed to the increased viscosity at the higher loadings.

Page 156: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

156

Chapter 5

5.6 Thermal Conductivity

The thermal conductivity of both the waferboard itself and the resin/filler system

were tested. Differences in the thermal conductivity of the waferboard were not expected,

even in those boards containing thermally conductive fillers, because of the number of

voids in waferboard. The change in thermal conductivity of a resin/filler sample was

thought to give some insight into the interaction between the resin and filler and to give

some sort of idea on how much the filler changes the resin thermal conductivity. Raw data

for all thermal conductivity testing is in Appendix H.

5.6.1 Waferboard Thermal Conductivity Results

Selected waferboard from Experiment 2 were selected to be tested. Only control

and CTC boards were chosen, presumably because they would show the most effect, if

any.

Three 51-mm diameter samples were cut out of the first control and CTC boards

made on Day 3 and 4 of Experiment 2. These samples were chosen to examine the

variation in thermal conductivity within a single board. One sample from the second and

third control and CTC boards made on Day 3 and 4 of Experiment 2 were also tested.

This was done to show variation between boards. Results are presented in the Table 5-15,

and show no difference between the thermal conductivity of the control boards and those

made with CTC filler.

Page 157: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

157

Experimental Results and Discussion

Table 5-15. Thermal conductivity results of control and CTC boards from Experiment 2.

Control CTC

Board Sample

ThermalConduct.(W/mK) Board Sample

ThermalConduct.(W/mK)

C2-C-B10 1 0.133 C2-CTC-B7 1 0.121C2-C-B10 2 0.129 C2-CTC-B7 2 0.125C2-C-B10 3 0.120 C2-CTC-B7 3 0.136C2-C-B11 1 0.131 C2-CTC-B8 1 0.118D

ay 4

C2-C-B12 1 0.115 C2-CTC-B9 1 0.128C2-C-B13 1 0.130 C2-CTC-B10 1 0.129C2-C-B13 2 0.137 C2-CTC-B10 2 0.122C2-C-B13 3 0.121 C2-CTC-B10 3 0.137C2-C-B14 1 0.132 C2-CTC-B11 1 0.131D

ay 5

C2-C-B15 1 0.137 C2-CTC-B11 1 0.133Average: 0.129 Average: 0.128

Page 158: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

158

Chapter 5

5.6.2 Resin/Filler Thermal Conductivity Testing

The thermal conductivity of the pure resin and the resin containing approximately

20 wt % filler were measured with each of the different fillers. The density of each sample

was measured and used to back calculate the actual weight percent of filler in the sample.

The results of this testing are shown in Table 5-16. On the left of each column is the

thermal conductivity of the sample and on the right is the actual weight percent of filler in

the sample. The average of each column is shown on the bottom of the table. “PF”

indicates the pure PF samples.

Table 5-16. Thermal conductivity (W/mK) of the resin and the resin/fillers at 55oC.

PF TC CTC L S BNW/mK W/mK wt % W/mK wt % W/mK wt % W/mK wt % W/mK wt %

1 0.27 1.22 23.5 1.31 17.3 1.30 22.7 1.45 22.1 1.62 27.02 0.26 1.49 24.1 1.16 20.8 1.00 22.2 0.98 19.9 1.54 28.13 0.29 1.73 23.7 1.50 22.0 1.00 21.6 1.69 20.1 1.37 28.34 0.32 1.21 24.6 1.45 25.2 1.17 19.8 1.65 19.9 1.36 28.25 0.29 1.22 24.4 1.52 24.9 0.96 24.1 1.49 28.16 0.34 1.20 24.0 1.83 25.17 0.34

0.30 1.35 24.1 1.46 22.6 1.09 22.1 1.44 20.5 1.48 27.9

The results show that the addition of thermally conductive fillers to the PF resin

does increase the transverse thermal conductivity of the resin. With filler loadings of

approximately 20 wt. %, the thermal conductivity of the resin increase from approximately

0.3 W/mK to over 1 W/mK. More testing would need to be completed to be able to

determine if some of the fillers increased the thermal conductivity of the resin more than

others.

Page 159: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

159

Observations, Conclusions, and Proposed Future Work

Chapter 6. Observations, Conclusions and Proposed

Future Work

Below is a summary of the results of this thesis. This summary is divided into

three sections: observations, conclusions, and proposed future work.

6.1 Observations

Three important observations were made during waferboard manufacturing.

1. Waferboard containing carbon fillers were grey in color, instead of the

typical brown color.

2. The closing times of boards containing fillers were 3 to 4 seconds faster

than controls.

3. Waferboard manufactured under different ambient conditions, using

different material lots and personnel are not of the same quality

(Section 5.1).

6.2 Conclusions

Below is a summary of the conclusions that were drawn from the experimental

work presented in Chapter 5. The 95 % confidence level for statistical analysis was used

throughout this project.

1. Only the coarse ThermocarbTM Specialty Graphite significantly

decreased thickness swell at 1 wt % loading, on an oven dried wood

weight basis,, but this improvement was not at the same level as wax

provides, which is added to OSB in typical commercial manufacturing

(Experiment 1, Section 5.1).

Page 160: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

160

Chapter 6

2. Some fillers at the 1 wt % loading level, did decrease the bending

properties (MOE and MOR), but all values were still within the typical

acceptable values of commercial OSB (Experiment 1, Section 5.1).

3. The freshness of the resin significantly affects the effectiveness of the

fillers (Experiment 2, Section 5.2).

4. Boron nitride, coarse Thermocarb™ Specialty Graphite, and Lonza

Manufactured Graphite fillers at the 1 wt % loading level appear to

significantly improve the internal bond strength of waferboard made at a

total press time of 5 minutes, when compared to controls (Experiment

2, Section 5.2).

5. Thermocarb™ Specialty Graphite and Signature® Crystalline Flake

Graphite fillers at the 1% loading level do not significantly change the

internal bond strength of waferboard made at a total press time of 5

minutes, when compared to controls (Section 5.2).

6. None of the fillers significantly improved the internal bond strength of

waferboard made at a total press time of 4.5 minutes, when compared

to controls. This results may be due to higher IB standard deviations

and too short of a press time to demonstrate filler effects (Experiment

3, Section 5.3).

7. The internal temperature profile in the center of waferboard containing

Thermocarb™ Specialty Graphite at 0.5 and 1% loading levels is the

same as controls (Section 5.4).

8. The through-plane thermal conductivity of finished waferboard

containing 1% coarse Thermocarb™ Specialty Graphite is the same as

controls (Section 5.6.1)

Page 161: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

161

Observations, Conclusions, and Proposed Future Work

9. The through-plane thermal conductivity of the phenol formaldehyde

resin increases from approximately 0.3 W/mK to over 1 W/mK with the

addition of the thermally conductive fillers at 20 wt. % loading level

(Section 5.6.2)

6.3 Proposed Future Work

In light of the above conclusions, a list of future work is presented below and is

separated into three categories of future work: manufacturing, mechanisms, and

modeling. It may be most effective to conduct the future work in these categories

simultaneously to develop a better understanding of how the entire system works.

6.3.1 Manufacturing

Additional work needs to be done to try to replicate the results presented in this

thesis. Work should concentrate on the fillers that showed promise: boron nitride, coarse

Thermocarb™ Specialty Graphite, and Lonza manufactured graphite. Additional work on

the Thermocarb™ Specialty Graphite and Signature® crystalline flake graphite is not

recommended. Other grades of hexagonal boron nitride, such as PolarThermTM PT110,

available from Advanced Ceramics, Corp., could be investigated. More replicates

(boards) made with the promising fillers would help to better define the effects that the

fillers have on IB strength.

The loading at which the fillers were added was not fully optimized. The 1 wt %

loading based on the oven dried weight of the wood was chosen as a typical moderate

filler amount for waferboard. Additional loadings of 0.5 and 2 wt % should be

investigated, using the Experiment 2 manufacturing procedure and fresh resin. The

experiment should be repeated within a few days of each other to minimize changes in

ambient conditions.

Page 162: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

162

Chapter 6

Significant improvements could be made to the IB testing procedure by increasing

the sample size from 51 by 51 mm to a larger size, possibly 100 by 100 mm. The larger

size would be bigger than the strands, which is important for getting consistent test

results. A load cell larger than 4 kN would be required for testing depending on the

anticipated IB strength. Also, new test machine grips and blocks appropriate to the size of

the sample would be required. Increasing the size of the test sample to be larger than the

flake size would likely eliminate much of the variability found in IB testing due to the

relatively small size of the test samples.

Adding thermally conductive fillers to OSB may be best applied to manufacturing

of thicker boards. The largest boards made commercially are 32 mm thick. In a

commercial plant it is difficult to correctly adjust the processing parameters, such as press

time, to make these boards. If the thermal conductivity theory is correct, then the addition

of the fillers may help ease the manufacturing of the thicker boards. The price of specialty

OSB also has a better opportunity to offset the higher costs of the thermally conductive

fillers. Additional manufacturing could be done on boards larger than 25 mm thick, even

up to 38 mm thick and may also allow differences in internal temperature profile to be

more apparent.

In addition to the property testing done in this thesis, other potential benefits of

adding thermally conductive fillers to OSB or waferboard should be investigated.

Improvements to thickness swelling and dimensional stability could be investigated more

extensively, possibly with the addition of wax. Another suggestion is testing for improved

fire resistance, since the thermally conductive filler can withstand higher temperatures than

the wood flakes.

6.3.2 Mechanisms

Work needs to be done to determine how and why the fillers are affecting the

waferboard properties, and to determine if the filler effects are due to the degree of resin

Page 163: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

163

Observations, Conclusions, and Proposed Future Work

cure, as hypothesized. Some of the fillers investigated improved IB strength and some

didn’t. Why was this the case? Research into the possible mechanisms of how the fillers

behave in the waferboard system could help answer these questions.

In-situ measurements of temperature, vapor pressure, and density, made during

pressing like those mentioned by Wang could help better understand what occurs during

the pressing process {1}. This would provide additional data on each board produced and

may be used to explain results of physical property testing that would be performed later.

This work would be done using the fillers that appear to improve IB strength and would

be done with more sophisticated equipment than that described in Section 4.2.8.

Image analysis of the failure of wood of tested IB specimens as done by Ellis may

also provide insight into how the filler is behaving {55}. A higher degree of wood failure

would indicate stronger bonding. To use this method, higher resin amounts of 6 % would

be required. Higher resin content may allow for conductive effects to be more obvious

and would help with both modeling and explaining mechanisms.

Differences in closing times were observed in boards that contained filler. All

fillers used in this project are known to be excellent lubricants. A study into why the

closing time is different with boards containing fillers may help explain the mechanism.

More sophisticated equipment, such as an automated press, would be needed to study this

further.

The adhesion between PF resin and the thermally conductive fillers could also help

in understanding the mechanisms and why some of the fillers tested improved IB strength,

while others did not. The surface energy of each material is one measurement that can be

made to gauge adhesion between two materials. The surface energy of the fillers and PF

resin studied in this thesis could be measured at MTU using the newly acquired Kruss K12

Tensiometer.

More extensive testing of the thermal conductivity of the resin/filler system could

help. The thermal conductivity of the resin at additional filler loadings could be done.

Page 164: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

164

Chapter 6

6.3.3 Modeling

Models have been proposed to describe the temperature profile of waferboard

during pressing. These models have not yet contained a conduction term. The

importance of conduction heat transfer during hot pressing is not well understood.

Modeling could help determine the possible effectiveness of increasing the thermal

conductivity of the resin. If increasing the thermal conductivity of the resin is shown to be

effective at increasing heat transfer into the core of the board, then a model could be used

to help determine optimum loading levels of fillers as described in Section 6.3.1.

Page 165: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

165

References List

Reference List

“Advanced Ceramic Powders and Shapes” (1999). Cleveland, OH, Advanced Ceramics

Corporation.

Barry, A. O. & Corneau, D. (1999). “Volatile Organic Chemicals Emissions from OSB as

a Function of Processing Parameters.” Holzforschung, 53, 441-446.

Bolton, A. J. & Humphrey, P. E. (1988). “The hot pressing of dry-formed wood-based

composites. Part I. A review of the literature, identifying the primary physical

processes and the nature of their interaction.” Holzforschung, 42, 403-406.

Bolton, A. J., Humphrey, P. E., & Kavvouras, P. K. (1989). “The hot pressing of dry-

formed wood-based composites. Part III. Predicted vapour pressure and

temperature variation with time, compared with experimental data for laboratory

boards.” Holzforschung, 43, 265-274.

“Boron Nitride Powder Grade HCP” (2001). Cleveland, OH, Advanced Ceramics

Corporation.

“Carbonsource” (2001). Asbury Carbons, Inc. [On-line]. Available: wysiwyg://201/http://

www.asbury.com/csource.html

“Carborundum: Applications: Polymers” (2001). Carborundum [On-line]. Available:

http://carbobn.com/applications_poly.php3

“Cascophen OS-707 Data Sheet” (2000). Diboll, Texas, Borden Chemical, Inc.

Chase, H. A. (1985). “Oriented strandboard technology and products: Meeting today’s

needs and tomorrow’s challenges”. In Structural Wood Composites Conference

Proceedings. (pp. 21-25). Minneapolis, MN.

Page 166: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

166

Reference List

“Cummings Moore Graphite – Main” (2001). Cummings-Moore Graphite Co. [On-line].

Available: wysiwyg://45/http://www.cumograph.com/industry.html

Ebewele, R. O., River, B. H., & Koutsky, J. A. (1986). “Relationship Between Phenolic

Adhesive Cheisrty and Adhesive Hoint Performance: Effect of Filler Type on

Fraction Energy.” Journal of Applied Polymer Science, 31, 2275-2302.

Ellis, S. (1995). “Correlation of Waferboard Internal bond and Wood Failure as Measured

by Image Analysis.” Wood and Fiber Science, 27, 79-83.

Fisette, P. (1997). “Choosing between oriented strandboard and plywood” University of

Massachusetts at Amherst [On-line]. Available: http://www.umass.edu/bmatwt/

osb.html

Gardner, D. J., Waage, S. K., & Elder, T. J. (1990). “Bonding Flakeboard with Filled and

Extended Phenol-Formaldehyde Resin.” Forest Products Journal, 40, 31-36.

Glover, W. L. (1985). “Waferboard: Product in evolution.” In Structural Wood

Composites Conference Proceedings. (pp. 17-20). Minneapolis, MN.

Harless, T. E. G., Wagner, F. G., Short, P. H., Seale, R. D., Mitchell, P. H., & Ladd, D. S.

(1987). “A Model to Predict the Density Profile of Particleboard.” Wood and Fiber

Science, 19, 81-92.

Humphrey, P. E. & Bolton, A. J. (1989). “The hot pressing of dry-formed wood-based

composites. Part II. A simulation model for heat and moistre transfer, and typical

results.” Holzforschung, 43, 199-206.

Kelly, M. W. (1977). Critical Literature Review of Relationships Between Processing

Parameters and Physical Properties of Particleboard (Rep. No. FPL-10, May

1977). Madison, Wisconsin: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,

Forest Products Laboratory.

Page 167: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

167

References List

Koch, G. S., Klareich, F., & Exstrum, B. (1987). “Conventional Wood Adhesives.” In

Adhesives for the Composite Wood Panel Industry (1 ed., pp. 29-43). Park Ridge,

New Jersey: Noyes Data Corporation.

Lelonis, D. A. (1994). “Boron Nitride - A Review.” In I.Birkby (Ed.), Ceramic

Technology International (pp. 57-61). London: Sterling Publications Ltd.

Lelonis, D. A., Tereshko, J. W., & Andersen, C. M. “Boron Nitride Powder - A High-

Performance Alternative for Solid Lubrication”. 2001. Cleveland, OH, Advanced

Ceramics Corporation.

“Lonza Graphite Certificate of Analysis” (1993). Lonza, Inc.

Mantell, C. L. (1968). Carbon and Graphite Handbook. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Marra, A. A. (1992). “Characteristics and Compostion of Adhesives.” In Technology of

Wood Bonding: Principles in Practice (1 ed., pp. 76-80). New York, New York:

Van Nostrand Reinhold.

Matuana, L. M. & King, J. A. “Wood-Based Composite Board and Method of

Manufacture”. 066040-9712-01. 2001. 7-13-2001.

Miller, I. & Freund, J. E. (1985). Probability and Statistics for Engineers. (3 ed.)

Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

“Mineralogy of Natural Graphite - Asbury Carbons” (2001). Asbury Carbons, Inc. [On-

line]. Available: wysiwyg://19/http://www.asbury.com/mineralogy/naturals.html

Operating Instuctions: Density Determination Kit, Mettler 33360 210260. Mettler.

Operation & Maintenance Manual, Holometrix Model TCA-300 (2001). (1.4 ed.)

Bedford, MA: Holometrix.

Page 168: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

168

Reference List

“OSB Manufacturing Process” (1999). Structural Board Association [On-line]. Available:

http://www.sba-osb.com/sba/sba.osb.infor/sba.manuf_process.1.html

OSB Performance by Design: OSB in Wood Frame Construction (2000). (U.S. Edition

2000 ed.) Ontario, Canada: Structural Board Association.

Panels: Products, Applications and Production Trends (1996). (2 ed.) San Francisco, CA:

Miller Freeman Inc.

Personal Communication (8-23-2000). with Conoco, Inc. Fax: Malvern Analysis Results.

Personal Communication (10-10-2000) with Conoco, Inc. Fax: Aspect Ratio Results and

SEM Photographs.

Personal Communication (10-11-2000) with Conoco, Inc. Subject: Aspect Ratios OSB

Project.

Personal Communication (6-5-2001) with Conoco, Inc. Fax: Graphite Heat Capacity and

Specific Heat Information.

Personal Communication (9-25-2001). with Conoco, Inc. Fax: Physical Properties Tables.

Personal Communication (10-12-2001) with Conoco, Inc. Subject: Malvern.

Personal Communication (10-15-2001) with Conoco, Inc. Subject: FW: Micronized

Samples from Fluid Energy Processing.

Personal Communication (12-5-2001). with Advanced Ceramics, Corp. Subject: Re:

Aspect ratio for HCP.

Pizzi, A. (1994). “Phenolic Resin Wood Adhesives.” In Advanced Wood Adhesives

Technology (1 ed., pp. 89-147). New York, New York: Marcel Dekker, Inc.

Page 169: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

169

References List

“PolarTherm: Thermally conductive fillers for polymeric materials” (1999). Cleveland,

OH, Advanced Ceramics Corporation.

Schwetz, K. A. & Lipp, A. (1985). “Boron Carbide, Boron Nitride, and Metal Borides.”

In W.Gerhartz (Ed.), Ullmann’s Encyclopedia of Industrial Chemistry: Volume A4

(pp. 295-307). Germany: VCH Verlagsgesellschaft mbH.

Series 1600 UTM TestVue Test Calculations (1997). (1 ed.) Butler, Pennsylvania: Applied

Test Systems, Inc.

“Signature Product Data Sheet: Grade:2100" (1997). Superior Graphite Co.

“Signature Product Data Sheet: Grade:2101" (1997). Superior Graphite Co.

“Standard Practice for Evaluating Thermal Conductivity of Gasket Materials” (1987). In

Annual Book of ASTM Standards 1987 (pp. 538-542). Easton, MD: ASTM.

“Standard Terminology of Adhesives” (2001). In Annual Book of ASTM Standards 2000:

Volume 15.06: Adhesives (pp. 31-41). Easton, MD: ASTM.

“Standard Test Methods for Evaluating Properties of Wood-Base Fiber and particle Panel

Materials” (2000). In Annual Book of ASTM Standards 2000 (pp. 143-172).

Easton, MD: ASTM.

Suo, S. & Bowyer, J. L. (1994). “Simulation Modeling of Particleboard Density Profile.”

Wood and Fiber Science, 26, 397-411.

“Superior Graphite Co. – Signature” (2001). Superior Graphite Co. [On-line]. Available:

http://saato014.hut.fi/Hyotyniemi/publi

“Thermocarb Conductive Filler: Grade CF-300" (2001). Ponca City, Oklahoma, Conoco,

Inc.

Page 170: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

170

Reference List

User’s Guide 2: Data Analysis and Quality Tools (2000). (13 ed.) U.S.A.: Minitab Inc.

Waage, S. K., Gardner, D. J., & Elder, T. J. (1991). “The Effects of Fillers and Extenders

on the cure Properties of Phenol-Fromaldehyde Resin as Determined by the

Application of Thermal Techniques.” Journal of Applied Polymer Science, 42,

273-278.

Wang, S. & Winistorfer, P. M. (2000). “Fundamentals of vertical density profile formation

in wood composites. Part II. Methodology of vertical density formation under

dynamic conditions.” Wood and Fiber Science, 32, 220-238.

Wills, B. A. (1985). Mineral Processing Technology. (3 ed.) New York: Pergamon Press.

Wood Handbook: Wood as an Engineering Material, General Technical Report FPL-

GTR-113 (1999). Madison, WI: Forest Products Laboratory, USDA Forest

Service.

“Wood-Based Panel Products: Technology Roadmap” (2001). Forest Industries and

Building Products Branch of Industry Canada [On-line]. Available: http://

strategis.ic.gc.ca/pics/fb/engmap.pdf

Page 171: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

171

Ro-tap Data

Appendix A. Ro-tap Data

This appendix contains the data for the ro-tap analysis of the strands. Four batches

of strands were analyzed: two batches of commercial Lousiana Pacific strands and two

batches of pure Aspen strands made at MTU.

Table A-1. Ro-tap data for 5-23-2000 LP strands.

+25.4mm-25.4mm/+19.1mm

-19.1mm/+12.7mm

-12.7mm/+6.4-mm -6.4mm Total

Gross 106.84 17.9 25.54 38.4 33.4 222.08Tare 5.21 5.1 5.08 5.18 5.21 25.78Net 101.63 12.8 20.46 33.22 28.19 196.3Wt. % 51.8% 6.5% 10.4% 16.9% 14.4% 100%

Table A-2. Ro-tap data for 9-8-2000 LP strands.

+25.4mm-25.4mm/+19.1mm

-19.1mm/+12.7mm

-12.7mm/+6.4-mm -6.4mm Total

Gross 55.57 35.17 28.65 60.07 44.85 224.31Tare 5.11 5.13 5.17 5.28 5.2 25.89Net 50.46 30.04 23.48 54.79 39.65 198.42Wt. % 25.4% 15.1% 11.8% 27.6% 20.0% 100%

Table A-3. Ro-tap data for 4-17-2001 MTU strands.

+25.4mm-25.4mm/+19.1mm

-19.1mm/+12.7mm

-12.7mm/+6.4-mm -6.4mm Total

Gross 8.22 16.82 35.1 92.97 89.56 242.67Tare 5.11 5.16 5.19 5.07 5.07 25.6Net 3.11 11.66 29.91 87.9 84.49 217.07Wt. % 1.4% 5.4% 13.8% 40.5% 38.9% 100%

Page 172: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

172

Appendix A

Table A-4. Ro-tap data for 6-25-2001 MTU strands.

+25.4mm-25.4mm/+19.1mm

-19.1mm/+12.7mm

-12.7mm/+6.4-mm -6.4mm Total

Gross 12.58 22.04 56.09 77.34 76.13 244.18Tare 5.19 5.22 5.22 5.16 5.23 26.02Net 7.39 16.82 50.87 72.18 70.9 218.16Wt. % 3.4% 7.7% 23.3% 33.1% 32.5% 100%

Page 173: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

173

Waferboard Formulation Sample Calculation

Appendix B. Waferboard Formulation Sample

Calculation

This is a sample calculation for waferboard containing filler for Experiment 2, Day

4 waferboard manufacturing.

Board Specifications:

Furnish Moisture Content 2.18 wt %, dry basis (measured the day

before)

Resin Loading 4 g solids/100 g dry strands (0.04 wt.

fraction)

Filler Loading 1 g solids/100 g dry strands (0.01 wt.

fraction)

Resin Solids Fraction 57 wt %

Filler Solids Fraction 100 wt % (assumed)

Board Width 406.4 mm

Board Length 406.4 mm

Board Thickness 18.3 mm

Target Dry Board Density 0.641 g/cm3

Target Moisture Content 5.20 wt %, dry basis

Manufacturing Specifications:

Boards per Blend 3

Extra Material for Mixing 25 %

Extra Material for Blending 3 %

Page 174: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

174

Appendix B

kgg

kg

mm

cmmmmmmm

cm

gssDryBoardMa 932.1

1000

1*

1000

1*3.18*4.406*4.406*

641.03

3

3 ==

kgkg

assDryStrandM 840.101.004.01

932.1 =++

=

kgkg

assWetStrandM 880.10218.01

840.1 =+

=

g.kg

g*

sgDryStrand

SolidssinRegkg*.SolidsMasssinRe 6073

1000

100

48401 ==

g..

g.MasssinReWet 12129

570

6073 ==

g.kg

g*

sgDryStrand

idsgFillerSol*kg.FillerMass 4018

1000

100

18401 ==

( )%.%*

kg.g

kg*.*g..*kg.

ureContentBoardMoist 2051008401

1000

1570112129021808401

=−+

=

g.kg

g*kg.*)..(dWaterNeede 00

1

100084010520005200 =−=

g.).(**g.AmountsinReetargT 24842501312129 =+=

g.).(**g.ountetFillerAmargT 069250134018 =+=

g.).(**.untetWaterAmoargT 002501300 =+=

g.).(**)g.g.g.(mountetMixtureAargT 045603013000692484 =+++=

kg.).(**kg.ightetStrandWeargT 8095030138801 =+=

kg.g

kg*g

g

kg*g.

g

kg*g.kg.tetMatWeighargT 032

1000

10

1000

14018

1000

1121298801 =+++=

Page 175: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

175

Experiment 1 Data

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm3)

C-BN-B1 1 33.459 50.9 50.9 18.3 1.284 496 0.666C-BN-B1 2 30.293 50.9 50.9 18.2 0.753 291 0.604C-BN-B1 3 31.861 50.8 50.9 18.3 1.050 406 0.633C-BN-B1 4 33.035 50.9 50.9 18.4 1.146 442 0.652C-BN-B2 1 33.764 51.3 51.8 18.4 1.204 453 0.643C-BN-B2 2 33.076 51.1 51.6 18.3 1.091 414 0.638C-BN-B2 3 33.771 51.1 51.3 18.5 1.101 420 0.650C-BN-B2 4 33.882 51.1 50.5 18.6 1.152 447 0.657C-BN-B3 1 35.462 52.6 53.1 18.5 0.374 134 0.641C-BN-B3 2 34.516 50.0 53.1 18.4 0.658 248 0.658C-BN-B3 3 37.542 51.3 51.1 18.6 0.466 178 0.720C-BN-B3 4 35.591 50.8 51.3 18.7 0.529 203 0.682C-BN-B4 1 31.039 51.1 51.1 18.4 0.669 256 0.603C-BN-B4 2 33.530 51.0 50.9 18.6 0.275 106 0.648C-BN-B4 3 35.053 51.0 50.9 18.6 0.627 242 0.677C-BN-B4 4 37.973 51.1 51.0 18.8 0.783 300 0.724C-BN-B5 1 36.962 50.9 51.0 18.5 1.133 436 0.718C-BN-B5 2 34.218 51.0 51.0 18.5 1.134 436 0.664C-BN-B5 3 35.355 51.0 51.1 18.7 1.119 430 0.679C-BN-B5 4 35.625 50.9 51.0 18.5 0.893 344 0.691C-BN-C1 1 30.783 51.1 50.9 18.4 0.977 376 0.607C-BN-C1 2 30.466 51.0 50.9 18.1 1.028 395 0.609C-BN-C1 3 30.995 51.0 50.8 18.4 1.079 416 0.614C-BN-C1 4 32.871 51.0 50.9 18.1 1.127 435 0.662C-BN-C2 1 37.103 49.5 51.6 18.3 1.223 479 0.740C-BN-C2 2 32.643 49.0 49.0 18.2 1.310 545 0.696C-BN-C2 3 34.386 51.3 51.1 18.3 1.416 541 0.670C-BN-C2 4 35.294 52.1 49.5 18.4 1.463 567 0.694C-BN-C3 1 35.636 51.3 51.6 18.4 0.703 266 0.684C-BN-C3 2 30.803 51.6 53.6 18.3 1.020 369 0.570C-BN-C3 3 31.211 51.6 51.3 18.2 0.806 305 0.605C-BN-C3 4 33.600 53.1 51.6 18.4 0.950 347 0.622C-BN-C4 1 34.590 51.2 50.9 18.4 0.940 360 0.674C-BN-C4 2 34.712 51.1 51.1 18.4 1.324 508 0.674C-BN-C4 3 36.453 51.0 50.9 18.4 1.020 393 0.713C-BN-C4 4 35.411 50.9 51.0 18.5 1.160 446 0.688

Appendix C. Experiment 1 Data

Appendix C contains Experiment 1 data. This includes internal bond, static

bending, 24-hour thickness swell, 2-hour boil thickness swell, moisture, and average board

density results.

Table C-1. Experiment 1 individual internal bond test results.

Page 176: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

176

Appendix C

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm3)

C-BN-C5 1 33.895 51.0 51.0 18.6 0.609 234 0.654C-BN-C5 2 31.838 50.9 51.0 18.4 1.130 435 0.620C-BN-C5 3 34.803 50.9 50.9 18.4 1.099 424 0.680C-BN-C5 4 33.936 50.9 51.0 18.6 0.835 322 0.653C-C-A1 1 35.576 51.2 51.1 19.1 0.891 340 0.654C-C-A1 2 34.267 51.2 51.3 19.2 0.730 278 0.627C-C-A1 3 30.626 51.1 51.3 19.2 0.640 244 0.562C-C-A1 4 36.487 51.2 51.1 19.3 1.068 408 0.664C-C-A3 1 34.896 50.8 50.9 19.7 0.018 7 0.640C-C-A3 2 32.648 50.9 50.9 19.6 0.041 16 0.601C-C-A3 3 35.835 50.8 51.0 19.5 0.051 20 0.662C-C-A3 4 32.234 50.8 50.9 19.6 0.021 8 0.596C-C-B1 1 36.170 51.3 51.2 18.9 0.666 254 0.683C-C-B1 2 33.457 51.2 51.1 18.9 0.794 303 0.633C-C-B1 3 36.971 51.1 51.1 18.7 0.534 204 0.710C-C-B1 4 34.327 51.4 51.3 18.4 0.860 327 0.663C-C-B2 1 34.403 51.0 51.0 18.6 1.035 398 0.661C-C-B2 2 32.284 51.0 51.1 18.4 0.767 294 0.627C-C-B2 3 32.465 50.8 51.0 18.4 0.654 253 0.634C-C-B2 4 31.409 51.0 51.0 18.3 0.535 206 0.614C-C-B3 1 32.704 51.3 51.1 18.8 0.450 172 0.619C-C-B3 2 34.552 51.2 51.3 18.8 0.229 87 0.650C-C-B3 3 34.813 51.2 51.1 18.6 0.845 323 0.668C-C-B3 4 38.237 51.3 51.2 18.6 0.964 367 0.731C-C-B4 1 35.822 51.3 51.2 18.7 0.792 301 0.677C-C-B4 2 34.859 51.2 51.3 18.8 0.688 262 0.657C-C-B4 3 33.260 51.2 51.2 18.4 0.849 324 0.641C-C-B4 4 33.868 51.3 51.4 18.5 0.961 365 0.645C-C-B5 1 32.446 50.9 50.8 18.7 0.885 342 0.632C-C-B5 2 33.503 50.9 51.2 18.4 0.633 243 0.657C-C-B5 3 31.366 50.7 50.9 18.1 0.733 284 0.632C-C-B5 4 30.340 50.9 50.9 17.4 0.687 265 0.632C-C-B6 1 30.879 50.8 51.0 18.4 0.560 216 0.611C-C-B6 2 31.968 50.9 50.9 18.4 0.930 359 0.635C-C-B6 3 33.066 50.7 50.8 18.2 0.940 365 0.667C-C-B6 4 33.065 50.7 50.9 18.2 0.887 344 0.663C-C-B7 1 30.414 51.0 50.9 17.7 0.618 239 0.625C-C-B7 2 30.736 50.8 50.7 17.8 0.514 199 0.632C-C-B7 3 30.506 50.8 51.2 18.1 0.565 217 0.610C-C-B7 4 32.981 50.9 50.9 17.8 0.704 272 0.674C-C-B8 1 34.038 50.8 50.7 18.2 0.769 298 0.683C-C-B8 2 33.587 50.9 50.9 18.4 0.965 372 0.661C-C-B8 3 30.377 50.8 50.7 18.3 0.394 153 0.604C-C-B8 4 34.451 50.7 50.8 18.5 0.940 365 0.679C-C-B9 1 32.001 50.8 50.6 18.2 1.035 403 0.645C-C-B9 2 32.756 50.7 50.8 18.5 1.044 405 0.647C-C-B9 3 29.637 50.8 50.8 18.3 0.960 372 0.589C-C-B9 4 32.154 50.8 50.8 18.4 0.852 330 0.636C-C-B10 1 36.857 51.1 51.3 18.3 1.518 579 0.714C-C-B10 2 34.884 51.6 51.8 18.4 1.176 440 0.661

Page 177: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

177

Experiment 1 Data

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm3)

C-C-B10 3 36.591 52.6 50.8 18.4 1.473 551 0.694C-C-B10 4 35.254 51.6 50.8 18.5 1.443 551 0.678C-C-B11 1 36.624 50.8 50.7 18.2 1.465 568 0.729C-C-B11 2 36.682 50.8 50.7 18.3 1.341 520 0.724C-C-B11 3 32.233 50.9 50.6 18.1 1.033 401 0.644C-C-B11 4 37.016 50.8 50.7 18.3 1.479 575 0.732C-C-B12 1 35.311 51.1 50.9 18.5 0.936 360 0.691C-C-B12 2 34.191 50.9 51.0 18.6 1.156 446 0.667C-C-B12 3 33.103 51.0 50.8 18.6 0.594 229 0.645C-C-B12 4 33.050 51.0 51.0 18.6 0.496 191 0.642C-C-B13 1 34.134 51.0 50.9 18.5 0.934 360 0.663C-C-B13 2 32.284 51.0 50.9 18.6 0.527 203 0.627C-C-B13 3 31.011 50.9 51.0 18.7 0.545 210 0.598C-C-B13 4 34.010 50.9 50.9 18.7 0.707 272 0.656C-C-B14 1 32.918 51.0 50.9 18.3 0.372 143 0.652C-C-B14 2 33.476 51.0 51.1 18.2 0.643 247 0.662C-C-B14 3 31.720 50.9 50.4 18.3 0.580 226 0.635C-C-B14 4 35.017 51.1 50.9 18.3 0.780 301 0.691C-C-B15 1 31.898 51.0 51.0 18.7 0.396 152 0.615C-C-B15 2 31.500 51.0 51.0 18.7 0.302 116 0.608C-C-B15 3 32.819 51.0 51.0 18.6 0.441 170 0.637C-C-B15 4 30.164 51.0 50.9 18.4 0.366 141 0.593C-C-B16 1 30.298 50.8 50.6 18.4 0.675 262 0.600C-C-B16 2 32.636 50.8 50.7 18.7 0.676 262 0.637C-C-B16 3 31.465 50.7 50.7 18.7 0.846 329 0.614C-C-B16 4 32.792 50.7 50.7 18.7 0.761 296 0.639C-C-C1 1 35.849 51.2 51.3 18.6 0.438 167 0.686C-C-C1 2 33.394 51.2 51.2 18.6 1.061 404 0.639C-C-C1 3 31.228 51.2 51.4 18.3 0.610 232 0.604C-C-C1 4 34.244 51.3 51.2 18.6 0.901 343 0.654C-C-C2 1 32.309 51.1 51.3 18.4 0.890 339 0.626C-C-C2 2 35.376 51.2 51.3 18.5 0.908 346 0.680C-C-C2 3 33.865 51.0 51.5 18.6 1.254 477 0.649C-C-C2 4 33.238 51.2 51.2 18.5 1.320 503 0.642C-C-C3 1 34.359 51.4 51.2 18.6 0.939 357 0.653C-C-C3 2 38.152 51.4 51.2 18.5 0.686 261 0.730C-C-C3 3 35.668 51.3 51.3 18.4 1.329 505 0.685C-C-C3 4 34.997 51.4 51.2 18.6 0.998 379 0.665C-C-C5 1 36.294 51.1 51.0 18.1 1.318 506 0.716C-C-C5 2 33.549 51.2 51.2 18.2 1.333 509 0.656C-C-C5 3 33.007 51.2 51.1 18.3 1.366 522 0.642C-C-C5 4 31.348 51.2 51.2 18.4 1.095 418 0.605C-C-C6 1 33.297 50.9 51.1 18.3 1.105 425 0.661C-C-C6 2 36.462 51.0 50.8 18.1 1.525 589 0.735C-C-C6 3 34.142 50.8 50.8 18.2 1.280 496 0.687C-C-C6 4 34.559 50.8 50.8 17.9 0.640 248 0.706C-C-C7 1 33.729 50.9 50.8 17.8 1.060 410 0.696C-C-C7 2 30.708 50.8 50.9 17.9 0.636 246 0.630C-C-C7 3 33.995 50.7 50.7 18.3 0.988 383 0.683C-C-C7 4 30.364 50.7 50.9 17.8 1.046 405 0.627C-C-C8 1 30.576 50.7 51.0 18.0 0.893 345 0.620

Page 178: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

178

Appendix C

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm3)

C-C-C8 2 32.161 50.8 50.8 18.1 1.057 410 0.650C-C-C8 3 33.627 50.7 50.8 18.2 1.327 515 0.679C-C-C8 4 34.914 51.0 50.9 18.3 0.961 370 0.693C-C-C9 1 32.822 50.7 50.8 18.0 1.231 478 0.666C-C-C9 2 34.370 50.7 50.8 17.9 0.968 376 0.703C-C-C9 3 32.323 50.9 50.7 18.0 1.082 420 0.655C-C-C9 4 31.806 50.9 50.9 18.1 0.937 362 0.639C-C-C10 1 30.554 50.9 51.0 18.2 1.190 459 0.611C-C-C10 2 32.940 50.8 50.8 18.4 1.063 412 0.654C-C-C10 3 32.222 50.9 50.9 18.3 0.891 344 0.640C-C-C10 4 32.517 50.8 50.8 18.2 1.064 412 0.653C-C-C11 1 33.739 51.1 51.8 18.3 1.391 526 0.649C-C-C11 2 36.259 51.8 50.8 18.4 1.533 582 0.696C-C-C11 3 33.571 52.1 50.8 18.5 1.521 575 0.638C-C-C11 4 31.111 50.8 51.6 18.4 0.887 339 0.601C-C-C12 1 33.120 51.2 51.1 18.4 1.180 451 0.641C-C-C12 2 32.886 51.0 51.0 18.4 1.291 497 0.640C-C-C12 3 34.501 51.1 51.0 18.7 1.086 417 0.661C-C-C12 4 35.166 51.1 50.9 18.6 1.387 533 0.677C-C-C13 1 34.948 50.9 51.0 18.3 1.252 482 0.691C-C-C13 2 35.812 51.1 51.0 18.5 1.057 406 0.699C-C-C13 3 32.563 51.0 50.9 18.6 0.994 383 0.635C-C-C13 4 30.533 51.0 51.0 18.5 0.659 253 0.596C-C-C14 1 31.823 50.9 50.9 18.4 0.742 286 0.625C-C-C14 2 30.859 51.0 50.8 18.3 0.929 359 0.609C-C-C14 3 34.292 51.0 51.0 18.4 0.864 333 0.670C-C-C14 4 32.917 50.9 50.8 18.5 0.650 251 0.644C-C-C15 1 35.681 51.0 51.1 18.2 0.895 344 0.709C-C-C15 2 32.741 51.1 51.1 18.1 1.005 385 0.651C-C-C15 3 32.306 50.9 50.8 18.1 0.523 202 0.648C-C-C15 4 34.358 51.0 51.1 18.1 0.838 322 0.684C-C-C16 1 36.675 50.8 50.9 18.6 1.077 417 0.716C-C-C16 2 35.768 50.8 51.0 18.6 0.631 243 0.697C-C-C16 3 34.148 51.0 51.0 18.5 0.744 286 0.670C-C-C16 4 32.667 51.0 51.0 18.4 0.961 370 0.643C-C-C17 1 35.436 50.7 50.7 18.4 1.146 445 0.704C-C-C17 2 32.006 50.6 50.7 18.2 0.690 268 0.645C-C-C17 3 30.534 50.7 50.7 18.2 0.927 360 0.613C-C-C17 4 34.529 50.8 50.7 18.5 0.767 298 0.684C-CTC-A1 1 31.461 51.0 50.9 19.0 0.319 123 0.590C-CTC-A1 2 33.675 50.9 51.0 19.1 0.546 210 0.630C-CTC-A1 3 31.710 51.0 50.9 19.0 0.355 137 0.595C-CTC-A1 4 30.991 51.0 50.9 18.9 0.346 133 0.586C-CTC-A2 1 34.229 51.0 50.9 19.5 0.020 8 0.631C-CTC-B1 1 34.847 51.0 50.9 19.0 1.009 388 0.663C-CTC-B1 2 35.648 51.1 51.0 19.0 0.601 231 0.674C-CTC-B1 3 34.045 51.0 51.0 18.9 0.631 243 0.649C-CTC-B1 4 33.494 50.9 51.0 18.9 0.739 285 0.639C-CTC-B2 1 33.407 51.0 51.0 18.5 0.368 141 0.652C-CTC-B2 2 34.434 51.0 50.9 18.6 0.735 283 0.668C-CTC-B2 3 34.029 51.1 50.9 18.8 0.986 379 0.653

Page 179: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

179

Experiment 1 Data

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm3)

C-CTC-B2 4 34.343 50.9 51.0 18.9 1.066 411 0.657C-CTC-B3 1 32.157 51.0 51.0 18.3 0.446 172 0.636C-CTC-B3 2 31.400 51.0 51.0 18.2 0.421 162 0.626C-CTC-B3 3 28.167 51.0 50.9 18.2 0.359 139 0.560C-CTC-B3 4 30.846 50.9 51.0 18.4 0.554 214 0.607C-CTC-B4 1 33.155 51.0 51.0 18.8 0.790 304 0.637C-CTC-B4 2 34.436 51.0 50.9 18.6 1.093 421 0.667C-CTC-B4 3 33.217 51.0 51.0 18.4 0.838 322 0.651C-CTC-B4 4 33.710 50.9 51.0 19.1 0.858 331 0.638C-CTC-B5 1 36.288 51.0 50.9 18.7 0.862 332 0.698C-CTC-B5 2 33.538 51.0 50.9 18.6 0.668 257 0.651C-CTC-B5 3 33.913 50.9 50.9 18.5 0.822 317 0.663C-CTC-B5 4 36.535 50.9 51.0 18.6 1.054 406 0.709C-CTC-B6 1 32.873 51.1 51.1 18.5 0.980 376 0.641C-CTC-B6 2 35.772 51.0 51.0 18.6 1.215 467 0.694C-CTC-B6 3 36.148 51.0 51.0 18.7 1.164 448 0.697C-CTC-B6 4 32.346 51.1 51.0 18.7 0.810 311 0.624C-CTC-B7 1 36.367 51.0 51.0 18.5 0.663 255 0.711C-CTC-B7 2 37.567 51.0 51.0 18.8 1.000 385 0.724C-CTC-B7 3 32.522 51.1 51.1 18.7 0.842 323 0.629C-CTC-B7 4 35.265 51.0 51.0 18.5 1.053 404 0.688C-CTC-C1 1 31.214 50.9 51.0 18.7 1.064 410 0.595C-CTC-C1 2 31.465 51.0 51.0 18.3 1.037 399 0.612C-CTC-C1 3 33.857 51.0 50.9 18.7 0.915 353 0.648C-CTC-C1 4 32.246 51.0 51.0 18.6 1.005 387 0.619C-CTC-C2 1 35.526 51.1 51.0 18.8 1.515 581 0.674C-CTC-C2 2 36.090 51.0 50.9 18.7 1.264 487 0.690C-CTC-C2 3 33.609 51.0 51.0 18.4 1.019 393 0.653C-CTC-C2 4 35.859 51.0 51.0 18.6 1.454 560 0.690C-CTC-C3 1 32.784 50.9 51.0 18.4 1.024 395 0.644C-CTC-C3 2 32.025 50.9 50.9 18.4 1.382 533 0.627C-CTC-C3 3 35.226 50.9 50.9 18.6 0.950 366 0.683C-CTC-C4 1 35.088 51.0 51.1 18.5 0.765 294 0.681C-CTC-C4 2 33.562 51.0 51.0 18.4 0.887 341 0.656C-CTC-C4 3 36.004 51.0 50.9 18.7 0.996 384 0.692C-CTC-C4 4 33.389 51.0 50.9 18.5 0.775 298 0.651C-CTC-C5 1 34.353 50.9 50.9 18.2 1.460 563 0.685C-CTC-C5 2 35.156 51.1 51.0 18.2 1.507 579 0.697C-CTC-C5 3 32.262 51.1 51.0 18.4 0.777 298 0.634C-CTC-C5 4 34.419 51.1 51.1 18.3 1.475 566 0.678C-CTC-C6 1 32.259 51.0 51.0 18.3 1.026 395 0.638C-CTC-C6 2 33.081 51.0 51.0 18.2 0.922 355 0.657C-CTC-C6 3 32.695 51.0 51.0 18.5 1.057 407 0.640C-CTC-C6 4 30.733 51.0 51.0 18.4 0.805 309 0.603C-L-A2 3 33.920 50.9 51.0 19.3 0.018 7 0.632C-L-A3 4 33.757 50.9 50.9 19.4 0.022 9 0.626C-L-A4 4 32.897 51.0 50.8 19.4 0.015 6 0.611C-L-A5 4 34.004 50.8 51.0 18.9 0.022 8 0.649C-L-A6 1 33.366 51.0 51.0 19.4 0.015 6 0.621C-L-A6 3 35.888 50.9 51.0 19.2 0.029 11 0.673C-L-A6 4 37.850 50.7 50.9 19.5 0.027 10 0.702

Page 180: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

180

Appendix C

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm3)

C-L-B1 1 35.971 50.6 50.5 18.7 1.088 426 0.705C-L-B1 2 31.659 50.8 50.6 18.5 0.372 145 0.625C-L-B1 3 32.008 50.9 50.5 18.4 0.739 288 0.634C-L-B1 4 32.759 50.6 50.6 18.5 0.910 356 0.649C-L-B2 1 32.416 50.7 50.7 18.6 0.870 338 0.635C-L-B2 2 31.668 50.6 50.6 18.6 0.788 307 0.622C-L-B2 3 32.702 50.6 50.7 18.5 1.001 390 0.648C-L-B2 4 30.368 50.6 50.7 18.6 0.694 270 0.596C-L-B3 1 35.510 50.6 50.6 18.9 1.139 444 0.687C-L-B3 2 34.336 50.6 50.6 18.7 0.811 316 0.668C-L-B3 3 35.116 50.6 50.6 18.6 0.613 239 0.688C-L-B3 4 35.603 50.7 50.7 18.9 1.073 417 0.686C-L-B4 1 35.069 51.0 51.0 18.5 0.857 330 0.680C-L-B4 2 34.671 50.9 50.9 19.1 0.546 211 0.654C-L-B4 3 32.733 51.0 50.9 19.0 0.913 352 0.619C-L-B4 4 30.866 50.9 50.9 18.6 0.407 157 0.598C-L-B5 1 33.456 50.9 51.0 18.7 0.927 357 0.643C-L-B5 2 34.219 51.0 51.0 19.0 0.965 371 0.645C-L-B5 3 33.026 51.0 50.9 18.8 0.507 195 0.631C-L-B5 4 34.931 51.0 50.9 18.7 0.736 283 0.670C-L-B6 1 32.159 50.9 50.9 18.6 0.846 327 0.626C-L-B6 2 33.060 50.9 50.8 18.2 0.549 212 0.658C-L-B6 3 33.570 51.0 50.9 18.4 0.741 285 0.658C-L-B6 4 34.168 50.9 50.8 18.6 0.716 277 0.666C-L-B7 1 33.423 50.7 50.9 18.3 0.860 333 0.662C-L-B7 2 34.928 50.7 50.8 18.7 0.852 331 0.679C-L-B7 3 34.803 50.9 50.8 18.6 0.798 308 0.678C-L-B7 4 34.518 51.0 50.9 18.5 0.703 271 0.674C-L-B8 1 32.347 51.0 51.0 18.5 0.643 247 0.629C-L-B8 2 30.634 50.9 50.8 18.3 0.746 289 0.606C-L-B8 3 34.400 50.9 50.9 18.4 0.697 269 0.677C-L-B8 4 34.689 50.8 50.9 18.3 1.019 394 0.687C-L-C1 1 35.467 50.6 50.6 18.7 1.053 411 0.694C-L-C1 2 37.483 50.5 50.6 18.6 0.799 312 0.736C-L-C1 3 33.494 50.6 50.7 18.9 0.916 357 0.646C-L-C1 4 35.974 50.6 50.6 18.8 1.245 486 0.699C-L-C2 1 32.410 50.5 50.7 18.6 0.899 351 0.640C-L-C2 2 35.668 50.7 50.7 18.5 1.365 531 0.705C-L-C2 3 32.893 50.6 50.7 18.3 0.790 308 0.659C-L-C2 4 34.357 50.7 50.7 18.5 0.930 362 0.677C-L-C3 1 32.411 50.7 50.7 18.1 1.103 429 0.651C-L-C3 2 32.414 50.6 50.7 18.6 0.756 295 0.636C-L-C3 3 32.308 50.6 50.7 18.5 1.043 407 0.639C-L-C3 4 29.602 50.6 50.6 18.1 0.930 363 0.596C-L-C4 1 32.603 51.0 50.9 18.3 0.710 274 0.649C-L-C4 2 33.976 51.0 51.0 18.0 0.698 269 0.687C-L-C4 3 35.023 50.9 51.0 18.5 1.004 387 0.691C-L-C4 4 33.203 51.0 50.9 18.6 0.971 374 0.651C-L-C5 1 34.251 51.0 51.0 18.6 0.993 383 0.662C-L-C5 2 32.219 50.9 50.9 18.7 0.686 265 0.624C-L-C5 3 34.087 50.9 50.9 18.8 0.521 201 0.655

Page 181: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

181

Experiment 1 Data

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm3)

C-L-C5 4 33.403 50.9 50.7 18.4 0.821 318 0.656C-L-C6 1 32.369 50.9 50.8 18.1 0.594 230 0.647C-L-C6 2 35.830 50.9 50.9 18.3 0.949 366 0.707C-L-C6 3 31.789 50.8 50.7 18.5 0.705 274 0.623C-L-C6 4 31.647 50.9 50.9 18.2 0.781 302 0.628C-L-C7 1 32.626 51.0 50.8 18.6 1.244 480 0.634C-L-C7 2 31.654 50.9 50.7 18.6 0.640 248 0.618C-L-C7 3 35.398 50.9 50.7 18.4 0.897 348 0.699C-L-C7 4 36.506 50.9 50.7 18.4 1.532 594 0.720C-S-A1 1 33.236 50.7 51.0 19.2 0.018 7 0.624C-S-A1 2 32.789 51.0 50.8 19.1 0.014 5 0.617C-S-A1 3 34.172 50.9 51.0 19.2 0.012 5 0.640C-S-A2 1 35.052 50.7 51.0 19.7 0.022 9 0.641C-S-A2 2 35.171 51.0 51.0 19.4 0.018 7 0.650C-S-A2 3 31.354 50.5 51.2 19.3 0.013 5 0.586C-S-A2 4 37.164 51.0 50.9 19.3 0.018 7 0.696C-S-A3 3 31.029 50.8 50.8 19.3 0.015 6 0.583C-S-A6 3 33.565 51.0 51.0 19.7 0.013 5 0.616C-S-B1 1 35.887 51.1 51.2 18.7 0.853 326 0.689C-S-B1 2 34.438 51.2 51.0 18.6 0.386 148 0.665C-S-B1 3 32.453 51.1 51.1 18.5 0.537 205 0.631C-S-B1 4 31.715 51.1 51.0 18.6 0.747 286 0.615C-S-B2 1 33.727 51.1 51.1 18.5 0.606 232 0.657C-S-B2 2 33.144 51.1 51.6 18.4 0.734 279 0.644C-S-B2 3 36.206 51.2 51.1 18.3 0.738 282 0.713C-S-B2 4 29.854 51.2 51.1 18.2 0.295 113 0.590C-S-B3 1 35.118 50.9 51.0 18.2 1.018 392 0.697C-S-B3 2 35.018 51.2 51.0 18.5 0.804 308 0.680C-S-B3 3 34.086 51.1 51.1 18.3 0.610 234 0.672C-S-B3 4 36.973 51.0 51.1 18.5 0.388 149 0.720C-S-B4 1 33.428 50.7 50.8 18.3 0.725 281 0.669C-S-B4 2 31.416 50.7 51.1 17.8 0.732 283 0.642C-S-B4 3 31.646 50.8 50.9 18.1 0.764 296 0.637C-S-B4 4 34.170 50.9 50.9 18.5 0.803 310 0.670C-S-B5 1 32.572 50.9 50.8 18.1 0.644 249 0.657C-S-B5 2 30.071 51.3 50.8 18.3 0.813 312 0.595C-S-B5 3 32.117 51.1 50.9 18.3 0.662 255 0.636C-S-B5 4 32.198 50.8 50.8 18.6 0.752 291 0.632C-S-B6 1 29.566 50.9 51.2 17.6 0.531 204 0.610C-S-B6 2 29.629 50.9 51.0 17.9 0.599 231 0.603C-S-B6 3 33.171 51.0 51.2 18.7 0.788 301 0.640C-S-B6 4 27.487 50.7 51.1 18.4 0.433 167 0.545C-S-B7 1 35.085 51.0 51.0 18.6 0.940 361 0.683C-S-B7 2 33.278 50.9 51.0 18.5 0.917 353 0.652C-S-B7 3 34.406 51.0 51.0 18.5 0.783 301 0.674C-S-B7 4 32.401 50.9 51.0 18.6 0.809 312 0.631C-S-B8 1 33.296 51.0 50.9 18.4 1.003 386 0.656C-S-B8 2 32.993 51.0 51.0 18.3 0.940 362 0.654C-S-B8 3 28.981 51.0 51.0 18.1 0.190 73 0.578C-S-B8 4 31.190 50.9 51.0 18.3 0.251 97 0.618C-S-B9 1 36.055 51.0 51.0 18.5 1.133 436 0.706

Page 182: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

182

Appendix C

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm3)

C-S-B9 2 33.433 51.0 51.0 18.2 1.046 402 0.665C-S-B9 3 31.253 50.8 51.0 18.3 0.612 236 0.619C-S-B9 4 32.967 50.9 51.0 18.3 0.897 345 0.652C-S-C1 1 32.098 50.9 50.9 18.3 0.730 282 0.641C-S-C1 2 31.030 51.0 51.1 18.2 0.826 317 0.620C-S-C1 3 34.052 51.1 50.8 18.2 0.733 282 0.682C-S-C1 4 31.892 51.1 51.0 18.4 0.554 212 0.629C-S-C2 1 34.503 51.1 51.1 18.3 0.665 254 0.683C-S-C2 2 34.531 51.0 51.3 18.2 1.133 433 0.684C-S-C2 3 33.216 51.2 51.1 17.9 0.873 334 0.668C-S-C2 4 35.302 51.0 51.3 17.9 0.813 311 0.711C-S-C3 1 34.856 51.1 51.3 17.9 0.948 362 0.702C-S-C3 2 34.091 51.3 51.1 18.1 1.135 433 0.677C-S-C3 3 34.784 51.1 51.2 18.0 0.588 225 0.697C-S-C3 4 32.541 51.2 51.3 17.9 0.800 305 0.652C-S-C4 1 30.625 50.8 50.7 17.9 0.727 282 0.627C-S-C4 2 32.462 50.7 50.7 18.1 1.329 516 0.658C-S-C4 3 33.540 50.7 50.8 18.4 0.693 269 0.667C-S-C4 4 33.533 50.9 51.1 18.6 0.997 384 0.656C-S-C5 1 31.236 50.7 51.0 17.3 0.654 253 0.657C-S-C5 2 36.104 51.0 50.9 18.4 1.088 419 0.714C-S-C5 3 34.259 50.9 50.8 18.3 0.856 331 0.684C-S-C5 4 32.860 50.8 50.9 18.3 0.885 343 0.654C-S-C6 1 35.674 50.9 50.8 17.7 1.418 548 0.732C-S-C6 2 34.411 50.9 50.9 17.8 1.307 505 0.701C-S-C6 3 32.609 50.9 50.8 18.0 1.131 438 0.659C-S-C6 4 34.734 51.0 50.8 17.9 0.979 378 0.705C-S-C7 1 31.560 50.8 50.8 17.4 1.049 406 0.665C-S-C7 2 34.806 50.8 50.8 17.9 1.508 584 0.712C-S-C7 3 33.982 51.0 50.9 18.0 1.375 531 0.687C-S-C7 4 33.510 51.0 50.8 18.0 1.082 418 0.680C-S-C8 1 31.727 51.2 50.9 17.9 1.122 431 0.644C-S-C8 2 32.255 50.9 50.9 17.8 1.202 465 0.663C-S-C8 3 31.239 50.8 50.8 17.2 1.033 400 0.666C-S-C8 4 28.070 50.8 51.2 17.3 0.971 374 0.592C-S-C9 1 31.306 51.1 51.4 17.1 0.937 357 0.658C-S-C9 2 33.357 51.1 50.8 17.7 0.991 382 0.686C-S-C9 3 31.303 51.2 50.8 16.9 1.118 429 0.672C-S-C9 4 33.072 50.9 51.6 17.9 1.024 390 0.664C-S-C10 1 36.810 50.9 51.0 18.5 1.341 517 0.720C-S-C10 2 36.755 50.9 51.0 18.6 1.179 454 0.717C-S-C10 3 34.819 50.9 51.0 18.5 1.096 422 0.681C-S-C10 4 31.699 51.0 51.0 18.4 0.965 371 0.623C-S-C11 1 34.980 51.0 51.0 18.4 1.381 532 0.688C-S-C11 2 33.630 51.0 51.0 18.4 1.015 391 0.663C-S-C11 3 33.763 50.9 50.9 18.4 1.279 493 0.665C-S-C11 4 31.344 50.8 50.9 18.4 0.977 378 0.621C-S-C12 1 34.871 51.1 50.9 18.6 1.212 466 0.679C-S-C12 2 36.384 50.9 50.8 18.6 1.249 482 0.711C-S-C12 3 35.103 51.0 51.0 18.3 1.286 494 0.693C-S-C12 4 34.198 51.0 50.9 18.2 1.171 451 0.679

Page 183: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

183

Experiment 1 Data

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm3)

C-TC-A1 3 34.950 50.9 52.1 19.4 0.076 29 0.637C-TC-A1 4 35.200 51.6 50.9 19.8 0.015 6 0.633C-TC-A2 1 32.802 50.8 50.9 19.4 0.033 13 0.611C-TC-A2 2 33.879 51.5 50.8 19.4 0.033 13 0.623C-TC-A2 3 32.724 50.7 50.9 19.2 0.038 15 0.617C-TC-A2 4 32.876 51.0 50.9 19.7 0.020 8 0.602C-TC-A3 1 32.689 50.9 50.8 19.4 0.020 8 0.607C-TC-A3 2 34.774 50.9 51.2 19.5 0.016 6 0.638C-TC-A3 3 32.425 51.2 50.9 19.4 0.015 6 0.599C-TC-A3 4 30.890 51.2 50.8 19.3 0.015 6 0.576C-TC-A6 4 33.141 50.8 50.8 19.6 0.012 5 0.616C-TC-B1 2 34.580 51.1 51.2 19.0 1.198 458 0.646C-TC-B1 3 36.045 51.1 51.1 19.1 0.852 327 0.672C-TC-B1 4 31.506 51.0 51.1 18.7 0.696 267 0.598C-TC-B2 1 34.876 51.1 51.0 18.2 1.255 482 0.688C-TC-B2 2 36.384 51.2 51.1 18.4 0.734 281 0.708C-TC-B2 3 34.790 51.2 51.1 18.5 1.390 532 0.675C-TC-B2 4 33.686 51.1 51.1 18.5 1.322 506 0.652C-TC-B3 1 36.721 51.2 51.1 18.6 1.015 388 0.702C-TC-B3 2 32.814 51.1 51.1 18.6 0.742 284 0.629C-TC-B3 3 34.250 51.1 51.2 18.6 0.954 365 0.657C-TC-B3 4 32.541 51.1 51.1 18.6 0.885 339 0.624C-TC-B4 1 34.367 51.1 51.1 18.7 1.421 544 0.650C-TC-B4 2 33.241 51.1 51.1 18.7 1.243 476 0.629C-TC-B4 3 30.860 51.1 51.1 18.6 1.198 459 0.589C-TC-B4 4 34.413 51.1 51.0 18.6 1.253 481 0.656C-TC-B5 1 34.301 50.9 50.9 18.2 1.300 502 0.686C-TC-B5 2 34.403 50.9 50.9 18.3 1.311 506 0.681C-TC-B5 3 32.030 50.9 50.9 18.4 1.075 415 0.631C-TC-B5 4 32.636 51.0 50.9 18.4 0.665 256 0.644C-TC-B6 1 33.138 50.8 50.7 18.4 1.184 460 0.658C-TC-B6 2 32.187 50.7 50.7 18.5 0.998 388 0.635C-TC-B6 3 33.442 50.8 50.7 18.6 0.921 358 0.657C-TC-B6 4 32.969 50.8 50.7 18.6 1.135 441 0.646C-TC-B7 1 32.534 50.7 50.7 18.4 1.026 400 0.648C-TC-B7 2 30.417 50.7 50.7 18.5 0.618 241 0.601C-TC-B7 3 35.738 50.7 50.6 18.7 1.241 484 0.699C-TC-B7 4 34.175 50.8 50.7 18.6 0.626 243 0.670C-TC-C1 1 33.545 51.0 51.2 18.6 1.092 418 0.643C-TC-C1 2 34.371 51.2 51.2 18.5 1.128 431 0.662C-TC-C1 3 36.607 51.1 51.1 18.8 1.550 594 0.694C-TC-C1 4 34.664 51.0 51.1 18.7 0.959 368 0.662C-TC-C2 1 30.746 51.1 51.1 18.6 0.912 350 0.588C-TC-C2 2 36.970 51.0 51.1 18.8 0.897 344 0.699C-TC-C2 3 33.850 51.1 51.0 18.6 0.988 379 0.649C-TC-C2 4 30.467 51.1 51.0 18.3 0.288 110 0.594C-TC-C4 1 32.061 51.1 51.1 18.7 1.478 566 0.613C-TC-C4 2 35.026 51.1 51.1 18.7 1.416 542 0.670C-TC-C4 3 35.805 51.1 51.1 18.7 1.434 549 0.685C-TC-C4 4 34.633 51.2 51.1 18.7 1.108 424 0.662C-TC-C5 1 30.849 51.1 51.1 18.4 0.916 351 0.598

Page 184: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

184

Appendix C

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm3)

C-TC-C5 2 33.899 51.1 51.2 18.6 0.851 325 0.651C-TC-C5 3 34.087 51.1 50.9 18.4 1.082 417 0.663C-TC-C5 4 34.297 51.1 51.1 18.6 1.336 511 0.659C-TC-C6 1 32.663 51.0 50.9 18.0 1.350 520 0.657C-TC-C6 2 36.307 50.9 51.0 18.3 1.546 596 0.721C-TC-C6 3 35.521 50.9 50.8 18.3 1.483 574 0.707C-TC-C6 4 35.123 50.9 50.9 18.2 1.155 446 0.703C-TC-C7 1 31.960 50.6 50.8 18.3 1.078 419 0.639C-TC-C7 2 32.686 50.8 50.7 18.4 1.030 400 0.649C-TC-C7 3 32.926 50.7 50.7 18.6 1.183 460 0.650C-TC-C7 4 33.516 50.7 50.7 18.5 0.986 384 0.665C-TC-C8 1 32.238 50.6 50.7 18.5 0.516 201 0.639C-TC-C8 2 32.335 50.6 50.7 18.5 0.917 357 0.640C-TC-C8 3 31.806 50.7 50.7 18.6 1.086 422 0.625C-TC-C8 4 31.008 50.7 50.8 18.5 0.989 384 0.612

Page 185: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

185

Experim

ent 1 Data

Table C-2. Experiment 1 individual static bending test results.

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load MOE MOR Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (MPa) (MPa (g/cm3)

C-BN-A1 2 332.013 76.2 355.6 21.2 0.346 267 7.7 0.541C-BN-A3 1 367.539 76.4 355.6 19.4 0.600 723 14.5 0.648C-BN-A4 2 341.942 76.5 355.6 21.1 0.428 349 9.5 0.555C-BN-A5 1 367.001 76.4 355.6 20.1 0.599 661 14.0 0.626C-BN-A5 2 330.716 76.6 355.6 20.4 0.402 333 9.3 0.554C-BN-B1 1 339.334 76.2 355.6 18.5 1.804 4641 46.1 0.637C-BN-B1 2 345.385 76.3 355.6 18.7 1.839 4746 46.4 0.641C-BN-B2 1 334.787 76.4 355.6 18.4 1.353 3933 34.7 0.625C-BN-B2 2 352.737 76.5 355.6 18.9 1.690 4454 42.0 0.639C-BN-B3 1 346.789 76.5 355.6 18.5 2.029 4740 51.5 0.641C-BN-B3 2 332.877 76.4 355.6 18.9 1.771 4322 44.2 0.606C-BN-B4 1 338.802 76.6 355.6 18.5 1.775 4015 45.1 0.626C-BN-B4 2 345.255 76.4 355.6 18.9 1.826 4306 45.5 0.627C-BN-B5 1 337.630 76.7 355.6 18.7 1.869 4452 47.0 0.619C-BN-B5 2 341.432 76.5 355.6 18.9 1.510 4347 37.5 0.618C-BN-C1 1 342.544 76.2 355.6 18.4 1.906 5007 49.0 0.648C-BN-C1 2 341.664 76.7 355.6 18.7 1.866 4218 46.8 0.631C-BN-C2 1 350.553 76.4 355.6 18.3 1.795 4569 46.2 0.657C-BN-C2 2 320.122 76.3 355.6 18.6 1.528 4030 38.8 0.591C-BN-C3 1 349.358 76.3 355.6 18.4 1.929 4895 49.6 0.655C-BN-C3 2 347.748 76.4 355.6 18.7 1.736 4848 43.7 0.639C-BN-C4 1 351.127 76.3 355.6 18.5 1.907 4469 48.5 0.651C-BN-C4 2 333.962 76.6 355.6 18.7 1.834 4506 46.0 0.610C-BN-C5 1 344.282 76.4 355.6 18.5 1.885 4693 48.0 0.638C-BN-C5 2 340.700 76.4 355.6 18.8 1.812 4223 45.3 0.620C-C-A1 1 350.752 76.4 355.8 19.6 1.572 3330 37.8 0.606C-C-A1 2 352.387 76.2 355.9 19.1 1.537 3571 38.1 0.627

Page 186: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

186

Appendix C

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load MOE MOR Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (MPa) (MPa (g/cm3)

C-C-A2 1 349.833 76.1 355.6 21.0 0.554 419 12.5 0.575C-C-A2 2 350.694 76.2 355.6 20.2 0.514 477 12.0 0.599C-C-A3 1 358.258 76.0 355.6 20.9 0.798 642 18.1 0.592C-C-A3 2 346.906 76.0 355.6 19.3 0.702 1731 17.3 0.622C-C-A5 1 351.956 76.5 355.6 19.9 0.647 731 15.3 0.609C-C-A5 2 320.256 76.1 355.6 21.5 0.355 258 7.8 0.517C-C-A7 1 358.703 76.3 355.6 20.6 0.464 379 10.6 0.596C-C-A8 1 336.965 76.3 355.6 21.1 0.441 324 9.9 0.551C-C-A8 2 344.120 76.2 355.6 20.3 0.529 474 12.3 0.585C-C-A9 1 324.004 76.1 355.6 20.2 0.407 347 9.5 0.554C-C-A9 2 338.466 76.2 355.6 20.4 0.454 438 10.5 0.571C-C-A10 1 336.540 76.3 355.6 19.5 0.470 615 11.4 0.594C-C-A10 2 344.083 76.2 355.6 19.4 0.514 1224 12.5 0.611C-C-A11 1 344.885 76.0 355.6 20.0 0.338 428 8.0 0.598C-C-A11 2 345.052 76.3 355.6 20.2 0.524 603 12.3 0.592C-C-A12 1 359.068 76.0 355.6 21.0 0.450 384 10.1 0.591C-C-B1 1 364.330 76.3 355.6 19.3 1.596 3971 39.0 0.651C-C-B1 2 353.794 76.4 355.5 18.8 2.145 5156 53.7 0.649C-C-B2 1 350.424 76.4 355.7 19.1 2.220 4519 54.8 0.629C-C-B2 2 364.711 76.4 356.0 18.7 2.042 4749 51.5 0.668C-C-B3 1 345.770 75.8 355.7 19.2 2.217 4317 54.9 0.622C-C-B3 2 366.422 76.3 356.0 18.7 2.441 5124 61.6 0.672C-C-B4 1 331.919 75.4 355.8 18.7 1.847 4303 47.2 0.615C-C-B4 2 361.730 76.2 356.2 19.1 2.275 4366 56.4 0.650C-C-B5 1 331.774 76.1 355.6 18.3 1.522 3908 39.3 0.629C-C-B5 2 342.115 76.2 355.6 18.9 1.789 4234 44.8 0.630C-C-B6 1 345.569 76.2 355.6 18.4 2.117 4854 54.3 0.654C-C-B6 2 362.469 76.2 355.6 18.8 1.860 4459 46.7 0.671C-C-B7 1 354.207 76.1 355.6 18.4 2.023 4651 51.9 0.669C-C-B7 2 340.575 76.2 355.6 18.7 1.678 4142 42.4 0.634C-C-B8 1 348.775 76.2 355.6 18.6 1.721 4224 43.8 0.650C-C-C6 1 343.852 76.0 355.6 18.2 1.345 4314 35.0 0.660C-C-C6 2 349.643 76.2 355.6 18.8 2.189 5090 55.0 0.649

Page 187: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

187

Experim

ent 1 Data

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load MOE MOR Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (MPa) (MPa (g/cm3)

C-C-C7 1 346.276 76.1 355.6 18.2 1.794 4911 46.7 0.666C-C-C7 2 350.472 76.3 355.6 18.8 1.839 4996 46.3 0.652C-C-C8 1 351.338 76.1 355.6 18.1 1.829 4816 47.7 0.676C-C-C8 2 349.983 76.2 355.6 18.8 1.858 4719 46.6 0.647C-C-C9 1 317.482 76.0 355.6 18.6 1.439 3814 36.6 0.595C-C-C9 2 365.477 76.2 355.6 18.4 2.523 5970 64.8 0.691C-C-C10 1 344.624 76.4 355.6 18.4 1.918 4511 49.1 0.649C-C-C10 2 340.614 76.4 355.6 18.7 1.922 4242 48.5 0.633C-C-C11 1 358.566 76.3 355.6 18.4 1.741 4962 44.7 0.670C-C-C11 2 321.712 76.5 355.6 18.5 1.524 3711 38.7 0.595C-C-C12 1 340.610 76.4 355.6 18.6 1.451 3978 36.7 0.628C-C-C12 2 336.684 76.6 355.6 18.8 1.969 4201 49.1 0.612C-C-C13 1 319.713 76.4 355.6 18.5 1.397 4033 35.6 0.598C-C-C13 2 361.577 76.2 355.6 18.4 1.890 4938 48.5 0.681C-C-C14 1 336.665 76.1 355.6 18.4 1.718 4535 44.2 0.633C-C-C14 2 338.087 76.2 355.6 18.7 1.891 4760 47.8 0.625C-C-C15 1 342.290 76.4 355.6 18.4 2.099 4777 53.9 0.646C-C-C15 2 343.466 76.5 355.6 18.6 1.447 3936 36.6 0.637C-C-C16 1 326.558 76.1 355.6 18.4 1.675 5224 43.0 0.616C-C-C16 2 357.749 76.0 355.6 18.8 1.768 4817 44.5 0.662C-C-C17 1 352.955 76.1 355.6 18.5 2.085 4954 53.2 0.662C-C-C17 2 336.148 76.0 355.6 18.9 1.977 4476 49.5 0.620C-CTC-A1 1 341.253 76.2 355.6 19.7 1.082 2590 25.9 0.591C-CTC-A1 2 345.117 76.4 355.6 19.5 1.094 3142 26.5 0.604C-CTC-A2 1 345.718 76.4 355.6 19.7 0.463 919 11.1 0.602C-CTC-A2 2 352.650 76.3 355.6 20.2 0.594 1143 13.9 0.601C-CTC-A3 1 342.012 76.5 355.6 20.3 0.483 628 11.2 0.579C-CTC-A3 2 343.389 76.4 355.6 21.1 0.503 435 11.2 0.560C-CTC-A4 2 353.360 76.2 355.6 20.6 0.423 422 9.7 0.590C-CTC-A5 1 347.581 76.2 355.6 20.6 0.502 437 11.5 0.583C-CTC-A5 2 344.919 76.3 355.6 19.9 0.558 608 13.2 0.600C-CTC-B1 1 348.458 76.1 355.6 18.9 1.936 4037 48.5 0.639C-CTC-B1 2 343.307 76.2 355.6 19.0 1.642 3581 40.8 0.625

Page 188: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

188

Appendix C

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load MOE MOR Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (MPa) (MPa (g/cm3)

C-CTC-B2 1 347.006 76.4 355.6 19.2 1.873 3597 46.0 0.624C-CTC-B2 2 345.338 76.4 355.6 19.3 1.743 3594 42.7 0.618C-CTC-B3 1 340.588 76.0 355.6 19.0 1.758 3928 43.8 0.623C-CTC-B3 2 360.025 76.4 355.6 19.4 1.852 3969 45.0 0.643C-CTC-B4 1 347.709 76.4 355.6 19.1 1.906 3876 47.2 0.630C-CTC-B4 2 359.512 76.5 355.6 19.0 2.296 4872 56.8 0.651C-CTC-B5 1 360.013 76.7 355.6 19.1 1.984 3940 48.7 0.647C-CTC-B5 2 325.042 76.4 355.6 19.2 1.476 3421 36.3 0.585C-CTC-B6 1 352.045 76.4 355.6 18.8 1.827 4457 45.9 0.648C-CTC-B6 2 343.505 76.3 355.6 18.5 1.936 4527 49.4 0.642C-CTC-B7 1 342.957 76.3 355.6 18.8 1.882 4531 47.3 0.634C-CTC-B7 2 359.949 76.3 355.6 18.5 1.924 5524 49.2 0.677C-CTC-C1 1 337.529 76.1 355.6 18.9 2.121 4038 52.9 0.610C-CTC-C1 2 346.968 76.3 355.6 18.9 1.891 4227 47.2 0.627C-CTC-C2 1 326.221 76.3 355.6 18.7 1.602 3332 40.5 0.599C-CTC-C2 2 363.827 76.1 355.6 18.9 2.175 4788 54.5 0.662C-CTC-C3 1 351.303 76.3 355.6 18.8 1.837 4051 46.2 0.645C-CTC-C3 2 338.508 76.4 355.6 19.1 1.601 3740 39.5 0.610C-CTC-C4 1 360.329 76.4 355.6 18.8 1.905 4748 47.7 0.659C-CTC-C4 2 346.550 76.4 355.6 19.0 1.670 4050 41.4 0.627C-CTC-C5 1 311.848 76.4 355.6 18.6 1.708 4024 43.3 0.580C-CTC-C5 2 355.616 76.3 355.6 18.4 2.043 5165 52.3 0.669C-CTC-C6 1 322.439 76.4 355.6 18.6 1.728 4347 43.8 0.600C-CTC-C6 2 372.619 76.4 355.6 18.5 1.981 5474 50.5 0.697C-L-A1 1 340.154 76.1 355.6 20.8 0.553 568 12.6 0.564C-L-A1 2 348.712 76.2 355.6 20.5 0.401 592 9.3 0.585C-L-A2 1 347.462 76.2 355.6 20.8 0.487 475 11.0 0.576C-L-A2 2 353.200 76.2 355.6 20.4 0.562 518 13.0 0.596C-L-A3 1 354.261 75.8 355.6 20.6 0.526 595 12.1 0.596C-L-A3 2 330.150 76.1 355.6 20.5 0.349 352 8.1 0.557C-L-A4 1 361.740 76.2 355.6 20.2 0.555 638 13.0 0.618C-L-A4 2 339.592 76.1 355.6 20.9 0.501 391 11.3 0.560C-L-A5 1 378.518 76.3 355.6 20.3 0.622 1105 14.5 0.643

Page 189: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

189

Experim

ent 1 Data

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load MOE MOR Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (MPa) (MPa (g/cm3)

C-L-A6 1 377.015 76.3 355.6 20.0 0.779 811 18.4 0.651C-L-B1 1 362.287 75.9 355.6 19.0 1.993 3936 49.7 0.663C-L-B1 2 323.479 76.0 355.6 19.0 1.659 3625 41.4 0.592C-L-B2 1 343.184 76.0 355.6 18.9 1.574 3773 39.3 0.629C-L-B2 2 341.158 75.9 355.6 19.2 1.635 3815 40.5 0.619C-L-B3 1 358.076 76.1 355.6 19.5 2.079 4032 50.4 0.634C-L-B3 2 349.799 76.0 355.6 19.2 1.867 4017 46.2 0.632C-L-B4 1 365.431 76.7 355.6 18.9 1.873 3618 46.4 0.659C-L-B4 2 354.291 76.3 355.6 19.1 1.834 4287 45.3 0.638C-L-B5 1 338.756 76.5 355.6 18.9 1.577 3663 39.2 0.613C-L-B5 2 332.925 76.3 355.6 19.1 1.422 3699 35.1 0.599C-L-B6 1 357.022 76.2 355.6 18.7 1.861 4089 47.0 0.660C-L-B6 2 326.583 76.2 355.6 19.1 1.681 3743 41.6 0.591C-L-B7 1 362.510 76.3 355.6 18.6 1.838 3700 46.6 0.672C-L-B7 2 349.410 76.3 355.6 18.8 1.815 4651 45.6 0.641C-L-B8 1 369.877 76.3 355.6 18.7 1.948 5579 49.1 0.682C-L-B8 2 338.354 76.3 355.6 18.7 1.849 4476 46.7 0.625C-L-C1 1 349.974 76.3 355.6 18.9 2.105 4783 52.6 0.639C-L-C1 2 369.490 76.0 355.6 19.4 1.751 4838 42.8 0.660C-L-C2 1 346.526 76.1 355.6 18.8 1.978 4721 49.7 0.639C-L-C2 2 368.326 76.0 355.6 19.1 1.895 4474 46.9 0.669C-L-C3 1 358.834 76.0 355.6 18.8 1.966 4738 49.6 0.662C-L-C3 2 359.023 75.9 355.6 19.0 1.988 4501 49.5 0.654C-L-C4 1 355.533 76.4 355.6 18.7 1.995 4254 50.2 0.659C-L-C4 2 346.082 76.3 355.6 18.6 1.699 3966 43.0 0.646C-L-C5 1 360.832 76.4 355.6 18.6 1.873 4811 47.3 0.666C-L-C5 2 334.028 76.3 355.6 18.8 1.354 3775 33.9 0.611C-L-C6 1 363.765 76.2 355.6 18.5 2.114 5250 54.1 0.681C-L-C6 2 316.789 76.4 355.6 18.6 1.314 3810 33.2 0.586C-L-C7 1 378.293 76.4 355.6 18.6 2.654 5674 67.4 0.703C-L-C7 2 332.882 76.4 355.6 18.6 1.412 4000 35.7 0.616C-S-A1 1 359.383 76.4 355.6 19.6 0.547 1220 13.1 0.629C-S-A1 2 346.620 76.1 355.6 20.8 0.394 456 9.0 0.576

Page 190: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

190

Appendix C

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load MOE MOR Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (MPa) (MPa (g/cm3)

C-S-A2 1 360.413 76.3 355.6 20.0 0.490 882 11.5 0.619C-S-A2 2 331.315 76.0 355.6 20.5 0.377 391 8.7 0.559C-S-A3 1 343.795 76.2 355.6 20.0 0.513 677 12.1 0.592C-S-A3 2 338.542 76.3 355.6 20.1 0.349 464 8.2 0.579C-S-A4 1 324.550 76.0 355.6 20.5 0.390 356 9.0 0.551C-S-A4 2 350.227 76.0 355.6 21.1 0.382 351 8.6 0.578C-S-A5 1 313.795 75.9 355.6 20.7 0.269 255 6.2 0.527C-S-A5 2 359.511 76.1 355.6 20.7 0.457 484 10.5 0.604C-S-A6 1 325.123 75.9 355.6 20.2 0.430 410 10.1 0.559C-S-A6 2 349.088 76.0 355.6 20.5 0.410 443 9.5 0.590C-S-B1 1 347.649 76.1 355.6 18.6 1.268 4035 32.2 0.647C-S-B1 2 350.292 76.3 355.6 19.4 1.489 3890 36.3 0.626C-S-B2 1 344.097 76.2 355.6 18.7 1.565 3981 39.6 0.640C-S-B2 2 349.332 76.2 355.6 18.3 1.711 4554 44.1 0.661C-S-B3 1 357.418 76.2 356.2 18.0 1.987 5294 52.3 0.688C-S-B3 2 346.049 76.3 355.6 18.9 1.901 4071 47.4 0.633C-S-B4 1 341.142 76.0 355.6 18.4 1.531 4276 39.3 0.645C-S-B4 2 350.889 76.1 355.6 19.0 1.947 4010 48.4 0.642C-S-B5 1 334.328 76.2 355.6 18.5 1.337 4141 34.1 0.628C-S-B5 2 355.804 76.1 355.6 19.4 1.629 3557 39.8 0.641C-S-B6 1 362.363 76.1 355.6 18.6 1.927 4415 49.1 0.681C-S-B6 2 340.254 76.0 355.6 18.9 1.117 3878 28.0 0.628C-S-B7 1 334.896 76.1 355.6 18.6 1.919 4475 48.9 0.628C-S-B7 2 343.861 76.0 355.6 18.9 1.453 4314 36.4 0.633C-S-B8 1 322.645 76.2 355.6 18.6 1.556 4181 39.6 0.603C-S-B8 2 362.576 76.1 355.6 18.9 1.652 4438 41.2 0.665C-S-B9 1 345.824 76.1 355.6 18.5 1.645 4685 42.0 0.649C-S-B9 2 329.231 76.2 355.6 18.9 1.582 3901 39.5 0.604C-S-C1 1 344.326 76.2 355.6 18.2 1.956 4791 50.9 0.661C-S-C1 2 357.022 76.3 355.6 18.7 2.138 4913 53.9 0.665C-S-C2 1 340.082 76.3 355.6 18.4 1.947 4786 50.0 0.644C-S-C2 2 354.882 76.5 355.6 17.8 2.012 5189 53.1 0.690C-S-C3 1 360.051 76.2 355.6 18.2 2.136 5095 55.5 0.688

Page 191: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

191

Experim

ent 1 Data

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load MOE MOR Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (MPa) (MPa (g/cm3)

C-S-C3 2 338.816 76.3 355.6 18.5 1.517 4229 38.6 0.634C-S-C4 1 350.375 76.0 355.6 18.5 2.217 4574 56.6 0.660C-S-C4 2 355.697 76.0 355.6 19.0 1.857 4739 46.3 0.654C-S-C5 1 352.181 76.2 355.6 18.5 1.536 4506 39.1 0.661C-S-C5 2 343.174 76.1 355.6 18.9 1.888 4432 47.2 0.632C-S-C6 1 329.349 76.1 355.6 18.0 1.620 3818 42.6 0.636C-S-C6 2 358.363 76.1 355.6 18.4 2.327 5047 59.9 0.677C-S-C7 1 364.881 76.1 355.6 18.3 1.908 5144 49.5 0.698C-S-C7 2 325.168 76.1 355.6 18.6 1.544 4034 39.2 0.609C-S-C8 1 351.776 76.1 355.6 18.4 1.778 4891 45.8 0.670C-S-C8 2 338.703 75.9 355.6 18.7 1.613 4069 40.9 0.636C-S-C9 1 353.225 76.1 355.6 18.1 1.678 4535 43.8 0.681C-S-C9 2 343.638 76.2 355.6 18.7 1.461 4328 36.9 0.640C-S-C10 1 327.263 76.1 355.6 18.5 1.749 4674 44.8 0.616C-S-C10 2 348.829 76.2 355.6 18.7 1.963 4775 49.5 0.646C-S-C11 1 333.190 76.1 355.6 18.6 1.647 4542 41.9 0.623C-S-C11 2 353.221 76.1 355.6 18.8 2.296 4745 57.6 0.652C-S-C12 1 335.280 75.9 355.6 18.5 1.917 4933 49.1 0.631C-S-C12 2 337.296 76.1 355.6 18.8 1.464 4265 36.8 0.622C-TC-A1 1 330.278 76.3 355.6 20.1 0.536 1096 12.6 0.568C-TC-A1 2 346.284 76.1 355.6 20.8 0.621 821 14.1 0.576C-TC-A2 1 355.785 76.4 355.6 20.0 0.619 980 14.6 0.613C-TC-A2 2 327.330 76.1 355.6 20.8 0.408 478 9.3 0.543C-TC-A3 1 328.401 76.5 355.6 19.7 0.301 1765 7.2 0.571C-TC-A3 2 351.516 76.2 355.6 20.3 0.457 1642 10.6 0.595C-TC-A5 1 346.960 76.0 355.6 20.0 0.539 602 12.8 0.604C-TC-A5 2 346.645 75.9 355.6 20.5 0.462 445 10.7 0.589C-TC-A6 1 345.301 76.0 355.6 20.1 0.518 643 12.2 0.597C-TC-A6 2 342.724 76.1 355.6 20.3 0.521 543 12.1 0.584C-TC-B1 1 325.380 75.4 355.6 18.9 1.677 3755 42.3 0.594C-TC-B1 2 360.197 75.9 355.6 19.4 1.984 4158 48.6 0.638C-TC-B2 1 342.460 75.5 355.6 18.5 1.796 4190 46.2 0.644C-TC-B2 2 347.915 76.3 355.6 18.7 1.692 4519 42.8 0.644

Page 192: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

192

Appendix C

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load MOE MOR Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (MPa) (MPa (g/cm3)

C-TC-B3 1 335.050 76.5 355.6 18.8 1.758 3810 43.9 0.609C-TC-B3 2 354.375 76.3 355.6 19.2 1.842 4299 45.3 0.633C-TC-B4 1 337.920 76.5 355.6 19.0 1.257 3444 31.1 0.604C-TC-B4 2 344.622 76.4 356.0 19.3 1.602 3547 39.2 0.609C-TC-B5 1 322.045 76.3 355.6 18.5 1.499 3688 38.2 0.603C-TC-B5 2 319.234 76.4 355.6 18.8 1.109 3630 27.7 0.587C-TC-B6 1 341.348 76.1 355.6 18.6 1.513 3849 38.4 0.636C-TC-B6 2 352.981 76.0 355.6 18.9 1.857 4555 46.6 0.651C-TC-B7 1 351.096 76.0 355.6 18.7 1.906 4752 48.3 0.654C-TC-B7 2 341.025 76.1 355.6 18.9 2.009 4667 50.4 0.628C-TC-C1 1 341.995 76.2 355.6 18.8 1.595 3659 40.0 0.625C-TC-C1 2 368.285 76.3 355.6 19.1 2.343 4606 57.8 0.661C-TC-C2 1 358.184 76.2 355.6 19.0 2.343 4859 58.2 0.646C-TC-C2 2 341.198 75.6 355.6 18.9 1.770 3958 44.7 0.625C-TC-C4 1 331.195 76.0 355.6 18.7 1.535 3917 38.8 0.612C-TC-C4 2 341.195 76.3 355.6 19.1 1.480 3853 36.6 0.617C-TC-C5 1 337.255 76.5 355.6 18.8 2.088 4384 52.1 0.613C-TC-C5 2 361.257 76.2 355.6 19.0 2.105 4792 52.4 0.655C-TC-C6 1 334.803 76.3 355.6 18.6 1.852 4217 47.0 0.625C-TC-C6 2 340.255 76.3 355.6 18.6 1.576 4548 39.9 0.634C-TC-C7 1 325.201 76.1 355.6 18.4 1.353 3998 34.8 0.616C-TC-C7 2 348.754 76.0 355.6 18.8 1.850 4436 46.5 0.646C-TC-C8 1 344.364 76.1 355.6 18.7 1.660 4197 42.1 0.641C-TC-C8 2 339.914 75.9 355.6 18.7 1.629 4188 41.2 0.631

Page 193: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

193

Experim

ent 1 Data

Table C-3. Experiment 1 individual 24-hour soak thickness swell test results.

Board Weight Width Length Initial Thickness (mm) Final Thickness (mm) Thickness Dry DensityName (g) (mm) (mm) 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 Swell (%) (g/cm 3)

C-BN-A3 78.940 76.57 76.50 19.390 19.453 19.548 19.558 27.117 26.441 27.013 27.785 39.1 0.646

C-BN-A5 73.502 76.83 76.63 20.122 20.188 20.386 20.302 28.804 29.515 30.137 29.454 45.7 0.576

C-BN-B1 72.456 76.57 76.28 18.461 18.648 18.588 18.443 23.205 23.574 24.107 23.104 26.9 0.632

C-BN-B2 84.272 76.70 76.48 18.499 18.668 18.529 18.374 24.305 24.435 24.267 23.414 30.3 0.725

C-BN-B3 80.712 76.65 76.53 18.397 18.396 18.527 18.438 24.148 24.188 24.039 23.579 30.2 0.698

C-BN-B4 73.159 76.73 76.61 18.618 18.676 18.654 18.547 23.665 22.819 23.899 23.454 26.0 0.625

C-BN-B5 77.566 76.78 76.71 18.575 18.811 18.687 18.644 24.120 24.587 24.135 24.255 30.0 0.660

C-BN-C1 71.311 76.45 76.10 18.204 18.358 18.311 18.308 22.337 22.888 22.504 22.812 23.8 0.633

C-BN-C2 80.617 76.70 76.56 18.209 18.314 18.301 18.301 23.241 23.787 23.604 23.442 28.7 0.702

C-BN-C3 77.231 76.73 76.61 18.278 18.528 18.397 18.397 23.358 24.252 23.312 22.814 27.4 0.669

C-BN-C4 76.920 76.85 76.63 18.578 18.722 18.550 18.481 24.181 24.232 22.951 23.018 27.1 0.658

C-BN-C5 78.752 76.70 76.56 18.387 18.462 18.570 18.484 23.531 23.840 23.988 23.228 28.1 0.678

C-C-A1 77.994 76.55 76.40 19.205 19.234 19.012 19.114 24.625 24.648 23.419 24.422 26.9 0.643

C-C-A2 73.960 76.57 76.35 20.196 20.130 20.053 20.127 26.035 27.582 27.010 25.758 32.2 0.589

C-C-A3 77.312 76.67 76.45 20.102 20.247 19.812 19.820 26.604 26.685 25.758 25.212 30.4 0.618

C-C-A5 76.478 76.37 76.30 19.812 20.206 20.259 20.071 28.090 29.528 30.401 28.928 45.6 0.616

C-C-A7 84.665 76.73 76.56 20.183 20.166 20.262 20.295 29.787 28.974 28.438 29.822 44.7 0.665

C-C-A8 79.691 76.88 76.66 20.145 20.209 19.931 19.919 29.444 30.323 28.816 28.524 46.1 0.634

C-C-A9 74.251 76.47 76.40 19.957 20.168 20.368 20.323 30.102 30.099 29.543 29.876 48.1 0.589

C-C-A10 77.057 76.62 76.50 19.525 19.557 19.606 19.530 29.594 29.258 29.335 28.981 49.9 0.631

C-C-A11 70.527 76.60 76.35 19.609 19.972 19.774 19.764 27.971 28.969 29.114 28.362 44.7 0.574

C-C-A12 79.156 76.42 76.20 20.828 20.756 20.437 20.635 31.514 31.349 30.338 30.541 49.8 0.617

C-C-B1 82.099 76.62 76.50 18.964 19.017 18.760 18.776 25.029 24.890 24.094 24.450 30.5 0.698

Page 194: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

194

Appendix C

Board Weight Width Length Initial Thickness (mm) Final Thickness (mm) Thickness Dry DensityName (g) (mm) (mm) 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 Swell (%) (g/cm 3)

C-C-B2 68.374 76.47 76.35 18.646 18.694 18.542 18.613 22.802 23.404 23.211 22.728 23.8 0.587

C-C-B3 83.937 76.62 76.48 18.854 18.852 18.786 18.689 24.775 25.296 25.006 24.265 32.2 0.712

C-C-B4 77.768 76.47 76.38 18.814 18.966 18.829 18.839 24.648 24.242 23.828 24.572 29.0 0.658

C-C-B5 72.159 76.60 76.17 18.423 18.518 18.613 18.529 23.680 22.799 23.195 23.970 26.5 0.631

C-C-B6 76.607 76.67 76.30 18.428 18.561 18.588 18.392 23.147 23.851 24.905 23.244 28.7 0.671

C-C-B7 81.481 76.47 76.35 18.603 18.768 18.639 18.529 25.479 24.816 24.265 24.323 32.7 0.708

C-C-B8 69.128 76.29 76.23 18.232 18.724 18.504 18.517 22.474 23.973 23.523 23.759 26.8 0.606

C-C-B9 74.231 76.42 76.25 18.458 18.538 18.608 18.494 23.117 22.697 24.305 24.125 27.3 0.648

C-C-B10 76.083 76.60 76.53 18.217 18.411 18.448 18.387 22.855 24.026 23.813 24.110 29.1 0.660

C-C-B11 81.885 76.80 76.58 18.555 18.788 18.674 18.494 23.579 24.702 26.147 23.767 31.9 0.699

C-C-B12 77.749 76.85 76.76 18.689 18.923 18.783 18.677 24.646 24.681 24.371 24.282 30.6 0.662

C-C-B13 71.076 76.55 76.45 18.684 18.808 18.672 18.608 24.371 23.947 22.822 23.134 26.2 0.609

C-C-B14 74.751 76.57 76.40 18.387 18.498 18.552 18.527 24.669 24.686 25.268 25.072 34.9 0.651

C-C-B15 69.706 76.62 76.33 18.661 18.566 18.664 18.707 25.055 24.585 24.737 25.928 34.5 0.602

C-C-B16 76.745 76.37 76.20 18.575 18.691 18.682 18.705 24.135 24.534 24.356 24.011 30.1 0.665

C-C-C1 75.179 76.52 76.30 18.598 18.745 18.672 18.682 22.858 23.030 22.964 23.414 23.6 0.645

C-C-C2 74.970 76.73 76.45 18.606 18.666 18.550 18.463 22.692 23.373 23.716 23.790 26.0 0.647

C-C-C3 73.970 76.57 76.25 18.692 18.780 18.623 18.618 22.324 23.574 23.195 22.494 22.7 0.633

C-C-C5 74.710 76.62 76.23 18.387 18.518 18.542 18.415 22.588 22.728 23.048 22.664 23.3 0.646

C-C-C6 71.850 76.60 76.28 18.357 18.447 18.486 18.372 22.532 22.791 21.585 24.039 23.5 0.633

C-C-C7 78.607 76.62 76.38 18.331 18.360 18.423 18.392 23.782 23.416 24.691 24.605 31.4 0.694

C-C-C8 74.564 76.62 76.38 18.227 18.429 18.471 18.334 23.294 24.458 23.620 23.023 28.6 0.657

C-C-C9 75.256 76.29 76.23 18.425 18.273 18.410 18.451 24.295 22.583 23.668 24.303 29.0 0.665

C-C-C10 70.791 76.45 76.20 18.448 18.610 18.529 18.453 22.471 22.517 23.104 22.997 23.1 0.620

C-C-C11 76.615 76.67 76.48 18.293 18.340 18.387 18.336 23.401 22.238 23.543 23.673 26.7 0.665

Page 195: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

195

Experim

ent 1 Data

Board Weight Width Length Initial Thickness (mm) Final Thickness (mm) Thickness Dry DensityName (g) (mm) (mm) 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 Swell (%) (g/cm 3)

C-C-C12 78.120 76.80 76.56 18.433 18.510 18.415 18.506 22.794 23.830 23.437 23.396 26.6 0.673

C-C-C13 75.421 76.90 76.66 18.506 18.584 18.555 18.486 23.287 23.203 23.820 23.889 27.2 0.651

C-C-C14 76.149 76.55 76.40 18.415 18.556 18.580 18.580 23.642 23.947 24.026 23.805 28.8 0.659

C-C-C15 81.344 76.45 76.38 18.402 18.462 18.509 18.486 24.542 24.323 25.547 25.636 35.5 0.712

C-C-C16 80.668 76.57 76.35 18.407 18.487 18.527 18.466 24.359 24.648 24.826 24.757 33.5 0.705

C-C-C17 73.946 76.39 76.10 18.489 18.472 18.494 18.448 24.712 23.614 23.566 23.500 29.2 0.650

C-CTC-A1 73.542 76.42 76.10 19.428 19.129 19.294 19.258 25.499 23.825 25.034 19.258 21.5 0.609

C-CTC-A2 74.795 76.62 76.45 19.596 19.641 19.528 19.611 26.698 26.538 26.177 25.532 34.0 0.609

C-CTC-A3 77.903 76.37 76.33 20.061 20.351 20.282 20.318 29.180 28.898 27.706 29.393 42.3 0.619

C-CTC-A5 80.174 76.80 76.68 19.924 20.232 20.297 20.048 29.139 29.517 29.081 28.171 44.1 0.636

C-CTC-B1 80.830 76.37 76.20 18.776 18.928 19.035 18.781 23.891 23.513 24.013 18.781 19.5 0.692

C-CTC-B2 77.166 76.47 76.17 18.692 18.536 18.567 18.608 24.046 24.608 24.242 18.608 23.1 0.669

C-CTC-B3 72.823 76.55 76.10 18.829 18.689 18.626 18.646 24.760 24.008 25.210 18.646 23.9 0.631

C-CTC-B4 74.687 76.39 76.20 18.796 18.958 19.050 18.773 23.322 24.412 24.562 18.773 20.6 0.639

C-CTC-B5 77.393 76.50 76.15 18.730 18.686 18.562 18.621 24.534 24.295 24.752 18.621 23.7 0.670

C-CTC-B6 72.336 76.90 76.68 18.481 18.335 18.669 18.573 23.409 22.507 23.617 23.376 25.5 0.624

C-CTC-B7 81.906 76.83 76.78 18.659 18.895 18.819 18.613 24.430 25.372 25.804 24.623 33.7 0.699

C-CTC-C1 73.103 76.50 76.30 18.786 18.655 18.707 18.763 22.916 22.888 22.936 18.763 16.9 0.622

C-CTC-C2 77.898 76.40 76.25 18.799 18.890 18.959 18.796 23.249 23.015 23.338 18.796 17.2 0.661

C-CTC-C3 76.132 76.37 76.17 18.499 18.505 18.750 18.588 23.752 23.797 23.955 18.588 21.3 0.661

C-CTC-C4 79.668 76.55 76.05 18.793 18.625 18.628 18.606 22.802 23.332 23.820 18.606 18.7 0.688

C-CTC-C5 77.155 77.08 76.78 18.456 18.528 18.504 18.496 23.310 22.972 22.746 23.040 24.5 0.665

C-CTC-C6 80.777 76.85 76.71 18.598 18.681 18.659 18.578 24.834 24.808 24.752 23.993 32.1 0.693

C-L-A1 71.904 76.52 76.40 19.807 19.931 19.835 19.990 26.294 26.703 26.210 26.934 33.5 0.578

C-L-A2 72.859 76.62 76.43 20.135 19.990 19.888 19.863 31.255 30.874 29.489 27.559 49.3 0.585

Page 196: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

196

Appendix C

Board Weight Width Length Initial Thickness (mm) Final Thickness (mm) Thickness Dry DensityName (g) (mm) (mm) 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 Swell (%) (g/cm 3)

C-L-A3 76.780 76.55 76.45 19.637 19.852 20.013 20.023 25.250 27.031 28.169 27.973 36.4 0.618

C-L-A4 69.873 76.57 76.58 20.130 20.061 20.475 20.470 28.639 27.826 29.266 29.050 41.6 0.550

C-L-A5 74.261 76.57 76.53 20.084 20.227 20.622 20.363 29.820 31.077 31.910 30.536 51.8 0.584

C-L-A6 71.965 76.60 76.50 19.672 19.763 19.944 19.865 28.283 26.881 28.618 28.649 42.0 0.581

C-L-B1 74.213 76.24 76.15 18.936 18.999 18.870 18.702 25.527 24.953 24.295 23.739 30.6 0.637

C-L-B2 73.087 76.17 76.00 18.707 18.745 18.839 18.611 24.374 24.130 24.506 23.617 29.1 0.635

C-L-B3 80.046 76.37 76.28 18.872 18.923 18.951 18.887 24.028 23.782 24.399 25.222 28.9 0.682

C-L-B4 72.319 76.50 76.33 18.776 18.640 18.727 18.796 25.032 22.624 23.279 18.796 19.8 0.618

C-L-B5 78.869 76.42 76.28 18.804 18.930 18.976 18.814 24.564 24.288 24.072 18.814 21.5 0.670

C-L-B6 73.338 76.60 76.43 18.697 18.811 18.697 18.636 24.011 23.952 24.028 23.734 28.0 0.628

C-L-B7 83.516 76.67 76.33 18.575 18.569 18.608 18.768 24.138 23.785 24.082 24.900 30.1 0.719

C-L-B8 78.352 76.55 76.45 18.537 18.717 18.641 18.501 23.965 24.483 23.688 23.713 28.9 0.676

C-L-C1 76.516 76.37 76.23 18.621 18.874 19.096 18.738 23.597 23.508 24.529 24.031 27.1 0.655

C-L-C2 73.596 76.39 76.17 18.494 18.755 18.438 18.656 23.513 25.047 22.304 24.211 28.0 0.641

C-L-C3 73.606 76.32 76.07 18.430 18.475 18.628 18.550 23.358 23.132 24.082 23.840 27.5 0.643

C-L-C4 77.092 76.39 76.23 18.519 18.454 18.730 18.580 23.752 22.596 24.039 18.580 19.8 0.675

C-L-C5 78.319 76.52 76.53 18.692 18.890 19.939 18.702 23.465 24.458 23.589 23.282 24.4 0.659

C-L-C6 81.674 76.67 76.40 18.387 18.436 18.484 18.443 24.501 23.952 24.404 24.638 32.3 0.710

C-L-C7 67.580 76.55 76.40 18.585 18.676 18.428 18.524 23.457 23.533 22.075 23.264 24.5 0.585

C-S-A1 79.667 76.45 76.48 19.522 19.834 19.995 19.746 27.620 27.993 28.298 28.639 42.4 0.645

C-S-A2 72.280 76.14 76.43 19.764 19.947 19.741 19.761 29.637 27.851 27.262 28.575 43.2 0.588

C-S-A3 75.202 76.32 76.33 19.736 20.000 19.835 19.812 28.778 28.580 27.811 28.387 43.1 0.610

C-S-A4 71.294 76.60 76.35 20.018 20.036 19.962 19.962 29.548 28.397 28.486 28.649 44.0 0.574

C-S-A5 77.627 76.60 76.33 20.320 20.173 19.812 19.977 30.930 29.258 35.484 29.807 56.4 0.623

C-S-A6 79.030 76.60 76.35 19.942 19.954 19.863 19.868 28.872 29.020 28.524 29.360 45.5 0.639

Page 197: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

197

Experim

ent 1 Data

Board Weight Width Length Initial Thickness (mm) Final Thickness (mm) Thickness Dry DensityName (g) (mm) (mm) 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 Swell (%) (g/cm 3)

C-S-B1 76.079 76.60 76.40 18.491 18.559 18.537 18.519 23.518 23.307 24.516 24.054 28.8 0.661

C-S-B2 66.210 76.73 76.38 18.532 18.495 18.588 18.608 22.324 22.987 23.419 23.208 23.9 0.575

C-S-B3 73.725 75.96 76.40 18.758 18.472 18.613 18.763 25.009 23.386 24.219 24.717 30.5 0.642

C-S-B4 74.940 76.75 76.61 18.707 18.717 18.720 18.750 25.199 24.671 24.679 25.156 33.2 0.643

C-S-B5 76.442 76.80 76.68 18.606 18.788 18.773 18.738 23.541 24.907 25.311 24.742 31.6 0.656

C-S-B6 72.032 76.75 76.53 18.626 18.734 18.814 18.710 23.805 23.604 25.009 23.965 28.8 0.621

C-S-B7 77.925 76.65 76.40 18.517 18.607 18.633 18.621 25.265 24.907 24.191 24.935 33.6 0.676

C-S-B8 74.625 76.55 76.35 18.456 18.622 18.661 18.517 23.058 23.762 24.900 24.270 29.4 0.649

C-S-B9 77.293 76.60 76.30 18.481 18.620 18.580 18.585 23.942 24.049 24.229 24.049 29.7 0.672

C-S-C1 76.565 76.52 76.50 18.537 18.599 18.684 18.621 24.333 24.430 24.821 24.989 32.5 0.667

C-S-C2 78.051 76.67 76.50 18.245 18.261 18.128 18.110 24.864 23.675 23.813 23.345 31.6 0.693

C-S-C3 75.883 76.62 76.50 18.385 18.480 18.377 18.344 23.734 23.960 23.012 24.044 28.8 0.665

C-S-C4 80.235 76.67 76.40 18.606 18.709 18.793 18.646 24.061 24.158 24.874 25.118 31.5 0.694

C-S-C5 76.118 76.52 76.48 18.697 18.790 18.806 18.664 23.637 24.049 24.094 23.698 27.5 0.657

C-S-C6 75.962 76.65 76.53 17.981 18.070 17.938 18.047 22.870 23.396 22.289 23.368 27.7 0.678

C-S-C7 75.629 76.65 76.48 18.367 18.340 18.425 18.392 22.878 23.272 22.659 23.025 25.0 0.666

C-S-C8 76.317 76.88 76.48 18.453 18.633 18.496 18.430 24.392 24.610 23.350 23.368 29.4 0.666

C-S-C9 77.869 76.75 76.53 18.537 18.658 18.631 18.532 24.041 24.397 23.833 24.239 29.9 0.676

C-S-C10 76.944 76.55 76.40 18.430 18.536 18.585 18.555 23.137 23.056 24.816 24.963 29.6 0.670

C-S-C11 75.905 76.60 76.43 18.606 18.666 18.697 18.562 24.221 24.074 24.171 23.086 28.3 0.657

C-S-C12 79.741 76.55 76.33 18.466 18.625 18.603 18.583 23.683 24.501 24.275 24.747 31.0 0.693

C-TC-A1 80.610 76.47 76.28 19.581 19.475 19.510 19.571 27.033 26.571 25.845 27.076 36.4 0.665

C-TC-A2 78.541 76.37 76.48 19.685 19.924 20.119 19.906 26.916 27.361 28.499 28.959 40.4 0.633

C-TC-A3 76.431 76.55 76.43 19.507 19.437 19.497 19.682 25.890 25.174 25.146 27.333 32.6 0.626

C-TC-A5 75.112 76.39 76.17 19.520 19.598 19.644 19.517 27.323 26.754 26.482 26.495 36.8 0.621

Page 198: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

198

Appendix C

Board Weight Width Length Initial Thickness (mm) Final Thickness (mm) Thickness Dry DensityName (g) (mm) (mm) 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 Swell (%) (g/cm 3)

C-TC-A6 68.463 76.47 76.17 19.467 19.559 19.561 19.403 27.330 26.642 26.160 27.115 37.6 0.568

C-TC-B1 80.639 76.62 76.33 19.088 18.915 18.887 19.040 23.843 24.094 24.506 24.430 27.7 0.675

C-TC-B2 75.199 76.52 76.33 18.349 18.462 18.509 18.509 23.015 23.033 23.701 23.592 26.5 0.655

C-TC-B3 77.664 76.57 76.30 18.471 18.689 18.745 18.575 23.383 23.792 23.782 23.668 27.1 0.667

C-TC-B4 77.276 76.60 76.35 19.007 19.020 18.984 19.093 23.556 23.805 24.067 23.914 25.4 0.644

C-TC-B5 73.354 76.57 76.23 18.397 18.666 18.560 18.453 23.160 23.995 23.589 24.161 28.2 0.640

C-TC-B6 77.956 76.39 76.20 18.595 18.658 18.715 18.608 23.769 24.493 23.955 24.308 29.5 0.677

C-TC-B7 75.480 76.37 76.17 18.613 18.750 18.692 18.623 24.366 25.144 24.623 24.394 32.0 0.656

C-TC-C1 74.786 76.65 76.45 18.766 18.798 18.446 18.606 23.922 23.749 21.877 22.101 22.9 0.639

C-TC-C2 78.503 76.57 76.43 18.753 18.602 18.804 18.656 24.100 22.149 23.490 24.488 26.0 0.668

C-TC-C4 79.401 76.62 76.43 18.705 18.775 18.575 18.565 23.480 24.473 24.481 23.856 29.1 0.682

C-TC-C5 78.017 76.34 76.33 18.412 18.668 18.481 18.405 23.597 24.168 23.538 23.701 28.5 0.677

C-TC-C6 79.360 76.55 76.30 18.151 18.261 18.283 18.194 23.444 23.437 23.485 23.701 29.1 0.704

C-TC-C7 73.316 76.39 76.15 18.491 18.579 18.616 18.481 24.415 23.419 24.384 23.470 29.1 0.643

C-TC-C8 73.786 76.42 76.17 18.506 18.574 18.593 18.583 23.592 23.480 23.546 24.206 27.8 0.644

Page 199: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

199

Experim

ent 1 Data

Table C-4. Experiment 1 individual 2-hour boil thickness swell test results.

Board Weight Width Length Initial Thickness (mm) Final Thickness (mm) Thickness Dry DensityName (g) (mm) (mm) 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 Swell (%) (g/cm 3)

C-BN-A4 76.038 76.47 76.10 20.533 20.718 21.036 20.958 31.986 31.415 31.699 31.120 51.7 0.587

C-BN-A5 75.965 76.34 76.05 20.244 20.267 20.445 20.358 30.190 31.072 32.253 30.351 52.4 0.601

C-BN-B1 70.177 76.45 76.40 18.242 18.447 18.496 18.357 23.421 24.417 25.606 23.731 32.2 0.617

C-BN-B2 73.771 76.75 76.50 18.265 18.296 18.453 18.321 24.592 23.881 25.474 25.113 35.2 0.641

C-BN-B3 82.352 76.70 76.63 18.529 18.635 18.550 18.562 28.788 26.739 24.343 26.500 43.3 0.706

C-BN-B4 75.343 76.50 76.05 18.735 18.747 18.672 18.796 25.672 26.213 25.265 25.052 36.4 0.646

C-BN-B5 76.257 76.50 76.23 18.776 18.821 18.666 18.788 25.352 26.556 24.361 24.816 34.8 0.652

C-BN-C1 68.616 76.55 76.48 18.491 18.709 18.606 18.517 23.622 23.406 23.927 23.663 27.4 0.596

C-BN-C2 80.127 76.62 76.53 18.479 18.671 18.458 18.420 25.900 25.763 26.241 26.190 40.7 0.690

C-BN-C3 82.115 76.39 76.63 18.275 18.324 18.390 18.390 25.232 26.309 26.614 26.368 42.5 0.716

C-BN-C4 73.567 76.47 76.28 18.700 18.727 18.608 18.491 25.654 26.048 23.546 23.332 32.4 0.634

C-BN-C5 73.394 76.45 76.25 18.760 18.661 18.644 18.598 25.692 24.206 24.714 23.927 32.1 0.630

C-C-A1 77.179 76.78 76.43 19.502 19.549 19.528 19.502 26.538 25.987 26.020 26.119 34.1 0.622

C-C-A2 73.448 76.34 76.28 19.789 20.120 20.081 20.043 27.587 30.196 29.924 29.007 45.9 0.591

C-C-A3 78.716 76.57 76.25 19.411 19.282 19.167 19.248 27.630 27.417 27.714 28.222 44.0 0.655

C-C-A5 81.642 76.50 76.28 19.540 19.924 19.599 19.342 31.420 31.453 31.194 30.406 58.9 0.673

C-C-A8 76.950 76.67 76.68 19.853 20.288 20.386 20.018 33.604 34.138 33.325 33.325 67.0 0.611

C-C-A9 72.697 76.62 76.38 19.708 19.941 19.921 19.853 30.378 32.746 31.369 30.475 57.4 0.586

C-C-A10 71.075 76.57 76.53 19.370 19.531 19.436 19.378 32.690 32.720 32.652 31.938 67.4 0.586

C-C-A11 76.392 76.57 76.28 19.700 19.891 19.957 19.858 35.331 33.934 33.325 34.976 73.4 0.620

C-C-A12 78.616 76.32 76.02 20.676 20.985 21.036 20.800 35.204 36.500 36.017 35.433 71.6 0.609

C-C-B1 83.061 76.70 76.45 19.121 19.165 19.426 19.365 23.647 26.828 28.854 27.503 38.7 0.691

Page 200: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

200

Appendix C

Board Weight Width Length Initial Thickness (mm) Final Thickness (mm) Thickness Dry DensityName (g) (mm) (mm) 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 Swell (%) (g/cm 3)

C-C-B2 78.563 76.65 76.43 18.994 19.032 18.971 19.012 26.350 25.880 25.207 25.431 35.4 0.659

C-C-B3 81.546 76.85 76.43 18.994 19.088 19.139 19.279 24.600 26.327 27.353 26.863 37.5 0.678

C-C-B4 75.625 76.62 76.43 18.819 19.012 18.943 18.844 24.709 25.532 25.593 24.625 32.9 0.637

C-C-B5 77.063 76.57 76.48 18.672 18.821 18.603 18.626 25.941 26.134 26.012 25.626 38.9 0.665

C-C-B6 74.052 76.62 76.48 18.557 18.775 18.753 18.491 22.494 26.431 26.093 24.130 33.0 0.642

C-C-B7 77.201 76.70 76.33 18.428 18.538 18.618 18.542 26.307 27.534 27.254 26.492 45.2 0.673

C-C-B8 80.166 76.47 76.30 18.359 18.536 18.494 18.471 27.160 29.301 27.267 27.572 50.8 0.701

C-C-B9 76.401 76.45 76.33 18.395 18.447 18.504 18.481 25.999 25.019 24.740 26.251 38.3 0.669

C-C-B10 76.042 76.70 76.50 18.456 18.566 18.466 18.405 26.393 25.779 25.860 25.801 40.6 0.655

C-C-B11 77.393 76.45 76.25 18.689 18.765 18.672 18.677 25.298 25.690 25.202 25.065 35.4 0.664

C-C-B12 81.386 76.75 76.56 18.555 18.653 18.639 18.603 26.304 25.710 27.569 26.500 42.6 0.701

C-C-B13 80.158 76.65 76.38 18.532 18.589 18.524 18.573 27.442 26.335 25.926 27.120 44.0 0.692

C-C-B14 72.548 76.62 76.45 18.595 18.717 18.466 18.585 28.113 27.579 27.292 28.298 49.7 0.628

C-C-B15 74.708 76.60 76.43 18.689 18.673 18.763 18.661 29.045 27.971 28.397 28.331 52.2 0.642

C-C-B16 77.997 76.34 76.20 18.806 18.961 18.913 18.837 27.478 26.962 28.377 27.734 46.5 0.669

C-C-C1 79.680 76.78 76.43 19.002 19.109 19.060 18.557 26.172 25.959 25.268 23.360 33.1 0.671

C-C-C2 77.449 76.78 76.45 18.806 18.936 19.065 18.956 23.955 24.300 26.434 25.433 32.2 0.654

C-C-C3 83.385 76.55 76.30 19.053 19.132 18.966 18.976 24.968 26.076 25.017 25.885 34.0 0.700

C-C-C5 72.733 76.80 76.58 18.659 18.768 18.834 18.720 25.258 23.861 24.623 24.351 30.9 0.616

C-C-C6 71.931 76.67 76.40 18.514 18.727 18.606 18.491 24.450 25.108 25.047 23.787 32.4 0.627

C-C-C7 75.051 76.60 76.50 18.570 18.602 18.534 18.430 26.408 24.945 24.831 23.780 34.9 0.656

C-C-C8 78.001 76.70 76.43 18.494 18.699 18.593 18.476 24.907 24.973 25.100 25.580 35.5 0.679

C-C-C9 81.447 76.42 76.17 18.319 18.393 18.260 18.245 27.117 26.515 27.219 26.101 46.2 0.722

C-C-C10 72.825 76.42 76.33 18.382 18.355 18.443 18.438 25.118 24.788 24.013 24.943 34.4 0.641

C-C-C11 72.219 76.67 76.50 18.382 18.559 18.461 18.392 24.196 24.923 25.014 25.565 35.2 0.623

Page 201: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

201

Experim

ent 1 Data

Board Weight Width Length Initial Thickness (mm) Final Thickness (mm) Thickness Dry DensityName (g) (mm) (mm) 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 Swell (%) (g/cm 3)

C-C-C12 75.516 76.42 76.20 18.694 18.666 18.649 18.679 24.694 24.564 24.925 24.529 32.3 0.650

C-C-C13 76.374 76.80 76.56 18.397 18.251 18.512 18.405 25.588 23.797 26.510 25.212 37.5 0.667

C-C-C14 78.279 76.70 76.35 18.293 18.391 18.293 18.522 25.197 24.737 24.811 26.520 37.9 0.683

C-C-C15 76.876 76.60 76.58 18.580 18.683 18.715 18.481 26.909 27.750 28.059 26.302 46.5 0.664

C-C-C16 80.802 76.55 76.38 18.654 18.785 18.722 18.616 28.877 29.441 27.061 27.198 50.6 0.698

C-C-C17 72.467 76.42 76.15 18.504 18.701 18.433 18.499 24.923 25.969 24.648 24.460 35.0 0.634

C-CTC-A1 74.336 76.37 76.17 19.421 19.615 19.342 19.421 26.223 28.258 26.358 25.994 37.4 0.610

C-CTC-A2 79.422 76.55 76.35 19.721 19.852 19.774 19.843 30.617 30.831 32.184 30.765 57.2 0.642

C-CTC-A3 75.516 76.50 76.33 19.957 19.934 20.041 20.020 29.401 29.754 30.493 31.425 51.5 0.607

C-CTC-A4 77.944 76.83 76.53 20.114 20.178 20.152 20.231 33.655 34.620 34.138 33.680 68.8 0.615

C-CTC-A5 79.038 76.93 76.68 19.825 19.929 19.845 19.802 31.369 33.630 32.156 32.944 64.0 0.635

C-CTC-B1 79.321 76.42 76.05 18.913 18.992 19.009 19.007 26.193 26.627 27.562 27.363 42.0 0.677

C-CTC-B2 77.783 76.42 76.12 19.032 18.984 19.063 18.956 26.228 24.839 25.306 25.451 34.0 0.661

C-CTC-B3 75.519 76.37 76.15 19.060 19.137 19.111 19.012 25.812 25.509 25.433 25.525 34.1 0.642

C-CTC-B4 82.381 76.42 76.02 18.814 18.948 18.933 18.877 26.650 26.175 26.980 28.326 43.2 0.706

C-CTC-B5 78.090 76.39 76.17 19.037 19.205 18.938 19.045 26.114 26.233 25.616 26.020 36.5 0.662

C-CTC-B6 75.895 76.88 76.84 18.661 18.803 18.522 18.679 25.852 25.682 25.306 25.994 37.8 0.648

C-CTC-B7 73.404 76.78 76.66 18.580 18.490 18.539 18.547 26.703 25.001 24.958 25.728 38.2 0.635

C-CTC-C1 69.932 76.39 76.05 19.637 18.694 18.641 18.639 24.201 24.293 23.393 23.533 26.3 0.592

C-CTC-C2 74.095 76.37 76.07 18.567 18.594 18.801 18.659 22.987 23.040 24.587 24.331 27.3 0.637

C-CTC-C3 75.213 76.47 76.17 18.880 18.857 18.903 18.984 24.849 24.580 24.770 25.149 31.5 0.641

C-CTC-C4 78.671 76.39 76.20 18.740 18.788 18.616 18.651 25.585 26.335 25.710 24.694 36.9 0.678

C-CTC-C5 77.347 76.85 76.66 18.606 18.612 18.613 18.542 26.373 25.047 24.785 24.917 36.1 0.666

C-CTC-C6 70.719 76.83 76.73 18.641 18.607 18.606 18.440 26.386 23.813 24.666 25.486 35.2 0.609

C-L-A1 74.710 76.39 76.43 19.837 20.061 20.124 20.132 28.428 29.685 30.658 29.449 47.6 0.596

Page 202: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

202

Appendix C

Board Weight Width Length Initial Thickness (mm) Final Thickness (mm) Thickness Dry DensityName (g) (mm) (mm) 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 Swell (%) (g/cm 3)

C-L-A2 86.551 76.57 76.53 19.992 20.132 20.498 20.358 30.757 31.067 32.723 32.741 57.3 0.685

C-L-A3 81.073 76.65 76.48 19.830 19.852 19.688 19.693 29.827 28.954 29.467 29.462 49.0 0.656

C-L-A4 77.887 76.65 76.43 19.462 19.605 19.614 19.545 30.124 30.211 30.602 31.173 56.2 0.636

C-L-A5 81.551 76.67 76.38 19.271 19.430 19.431 19.144 31.224 32.085 30.643 31.519 62.5 0.676

C-L-A6 79.935 76.70 76.45 19.492 19.424 19.314 19.408 31.412 30.404 29.627 32.621 59.9 0.659

C-L-B1 75.291 76.37 76.15 18.633 18.729 18.837 18.738 26.175 26.292 26.050 26.167 39.8 0.650

C-L-B2 77.385 76.32 76.05 18.814 19.032 18.882 18.631 25.946 26.627 26.162 24.608 37.2 0.667

C-L-B3 80.929 76.24 76.10 18.915 19.170 19.050 19.032 26.332 27.010 26.975 27.869 42.1 0.688

C-L-B4 72.828 76.37 76.23 19.017 19.124 18.979 19.020 26.193 26.383 25.781 26.472 37.8 0.615

C-L-B5 80.598 76.42 76.15 18.992 18.984 18.849 18.862 27.706 27.163 26.053 27.021 42.7 0.685

C-L-B6 78.687 76.75 76.45 18.565 18.673 18.793 18.669 26.185 25.535 27.084 27.043 41.8 0.674

C-L-B7 77.520 76.47 76.33 18.656 18.790 18.679 18.524 26.866 28.174 27.844 26.477 46.6 0.668

C-L-B8 70.089 76.67 76.35 18.407 18.508 18.570 18.593 24.044 25.941 25.918 25.771 37.3 0.607

C-L-C1 85.607 76.34 76.05 18.928 19.147 19.091 18.954 27.229 26.185 26.515 26.855 40.4 0.727

C-L-C2 78.285 76.37 76.17 18.806 18.928 18.862 18.773 27.140 25.370 25.047 26.119 37.6 0.673

C-L-C3 79.854 76.34 76.07 18.639 18.923 18.796 18.707 25.359 27.231 26.586 26.391 40.7 0.688

C-L-C4 80.020 76.42 76.17 18.639 18.668 18.674 18.631 26.538 25.217 25.263 25.989 38.1 0.698

C-L-C5 79.506 76.70 76.40 18.527 18.704 18.573 18.613 25.014 26.609 25.324 25.878 38.3 0.685

C-L-C6 78.359 76.52 76.40 18.570 18.640 18.512 18.476 27.986 25.857 25.271 25.283 40.8 0.678

C-L-C7 80.535 76.62 76.35 18.598 18.561 18.519 18.555 27.089 26.815 26.068 25.824 42.6 0.697

C-S-A1 74.693 75.78 76.25 19.243 19.221 19.301 19.378 30.112 28.443 28.171 30.450 52.0 0.627

C-S-A2 73.812 75.32 76.35 19.332 19.615 19.591 19.558 29.870 30.168 29.436 31.158 54.6 0.616

C-S-A3 79.239 76.65 76.43 19.599 19.641 19.477 19.553 31.732 30.404 30.495 32.487 60.0 0.648

C-S-A4 77.166 76.52 76.45 20.358 20.654 20.668 20.376 33.426 35.865 36.805 36.627 74.0 0.606

C-S-A5 80.818 76.39 78.49 19.982 20.234 20.297 20.099 35.763 33.807 34.569 36.043 74.0 0.630

Page 203: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

203

Experim

ent 1 Data

Board Weight Width Length Initial Thickness (mm) Final Thickness (mm) Thickness Dry DensityName (g) (mm) (mm) 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 Swell (%) (g/cm 3)

C-S-A6 79.104 76.27 76.53 19.896 20.178 20.150 19.964 34.722 35.179 34.036 35.865 74.5 0.636

C-S-B1 77.631 76.67 76.25 18.936 18.648 18.656 18.743 27.541 25.593 27.638 27.432 44.4 0.667

C-S-B2 71.396 76.65 76.38 18.583 18.513 18.456 18.118 25.903 27.168 26.896 24.821 42.3 0.625

C-S-B3 72.192 76.52 76.38 18.534 18.569 18.423 18.537 26.767 26.492 24.798 26.335 41.0 0.628

C-S-B4 79.190 76.62 76.40 18.788 19.027 18.852 18.735 27.836 28.108 26.843 25.608 43.8 0.678

C-S-B5 74.855 76.67 76.40 18.847 18.999 18.887 18.834 26.962 27.389 25.987 26.175 41.0 0.640

C-S-B6 71.341 76.60 76.38 18.829 19.035 18.839 18.806 26.947 26.355 26.124 25.639 39.2 0.612

C-S-B7 78.180 76.55 76.43 18.781 18.714 18.524 18.534 29.157 26.970 25.540 26.045 44.6 0.677

C-S-B8 79.071 76.47 76.38 18.753 18.877 18.824 18.730 27.173 27.196 27.356 28.585 46.8 0.680

C-S-B9 79.501 76.42 76.45 18.758 18.867 18.771 18.672 27.531 28.067 28.141 27.277 48.0 0.684

C-S-C1 77.780 76.60 76.53 18.240 18.312 18.227 18.072 27.046 26.828 26.952 26.594 47.5 0.691

C-S-C2 80.945 76.70 76.40 17.874 17.996 18.019 17.920 27.059 25.720 26.576 25.265 45.8 0.729

C-S-C3 78.123 76.70 76.45 18.585 18.533 18.382 18.448 26.393 26.789 25.644 25.700 41.4 0.681

C-S-C4 77.019 76.65 76.48 18.837 18.994 18.875 18.915 25.979 26.246 26.228 26.022 38.2 0.659

C-S-C5 78.486 76.65 76.35 18.575 18.622 18.661 18.631 26.231 26.647 27.008 27.290 44.0 0.681

C-S-C6 75.564 76.70 76.40 18.207 18.386 18.308 17.915 26.609 25.885 25.418 23.302 39.1 0.668

C-S-C7 76.484 76.65 76.40 18.575 18.704 18.679 18.555 25.372 26.769 25.085 25.197 37.5 0.665

C-S-C8 78.507 76.62 76.43 18.631 18.722 18.578 18.557 26.210 25.959 24.775 24.958 36.9 0.684

C-S-C9 76.762 76.60 76.35 18.397 18.498 18.542 18.534 25.052 24.895 24.834 24.839 34.8 0.673

C-S-C10 79.744 76.57 76.43 18.641 18.760 18.697 18.682 27.442 27.221 26.495 26.332 43.8 0.688

C-S-C11 77.277 76.45 76.35 18.697 18.928 18.781 18.697 25.639 26.505 25.857 26.035 38.6 0.666

C-S-C12 78.592 76.42 76.30 18.687 18.811 18.598 18.758 27.064 26.398 25.817 29.101 44.9 0.679

C-TC-A1 81.809 76.27 76.35 19.802 19.812 19.789 19.754 30.043 30.899 30.635 31.156 55.2 0.667

C-TC-A2 81.813 76.52 76.40 19.629 19.753 19.629 19.652 31.554 32.103 30.508 31.120 59.4 0.667

C-TC-A3 75.106 76.42 76.38 19.642 19.929 19.804 19.731 28.433 29.413 29.489 29.916 48.3 0.609

Page 204: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

204

Appendix C

Board Weight Width Length Initial Thickness (mm) Final Thickness (mm) Thickness Dry DensityName (g) (mm) (mm) 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 Swell (%) (g/cm 3)

C-TC-A5 76.337 76.37 76.10 19.634 19.814 19.860 19.622 30.945 31.087 31.113 30.226 56.4 0.627

C-TC-A6 74.998 76.39 76.23 19.444 19.689 19.741 19.538 29.416 31.468 31.971 30.023 56.8 0.619

C-TC-B1 75.680 76.65 76.30 18.989 19.002 18.865 18.900 25.123 25.654 24.661 24.709 32.3 0.635

C-TC-B2 80.336 76.60 76.33 18.501 18.640 18.461 18.412 25.827 26.233 24.120 25.006 36.8 0.698

C-TC-B3 76.907 76.62 76.23 19.083 19.055 19.014 19.116 26.223 26.193 25.324 25.372 35.3 0.645

C-TC-B4 79.596 76.57 76.30 18.867 18.923 18.999 18.943 25.362 24.834 26.251 25.293 34.4 0.668

C-TC-B5 73.844 76.52 76.30 18.354 18.368 18.481 18.374 25.512 25.568 25.072 24.163 36.4 0.648

C-TC-B6 76.373 76.37 76.23 18.664 18.844 18.735 18.654 26.680 27.168 26.688 25.672 41.9 0.661

C-TC-B7 75.717 76.29 76.25 18.750 18.872 18.776 18.791 26.716 27.249 27.102 28.926 46.4 0.653

C-TC-C1 76.493 76.65 76.33 18.956 18.933 19.131 19.042 24.656 25.151 27.056 24.973 34.0 0.643

C-TC-C2 73.551 76.55 76.38 18.715 18.714 18.715 18.837 23.891 24.671 25.042 24.892 31.4 0.625

C-TC-C4 73.568 76.62 76.33 18.491 18.729 18.814 18.730 23.584 24.803 25.530 24.653 31.9 0.631

C-TC-C5 76.974 76.62 76.25 18.964 18.885 18.880 18.847 26.530 25.603 25.740 25.398 36.7 0.652

C-TC-C6 77.519 76.45 76.23 18.400 18.597 18.461 18.420 24.920 26.279 25.484 24.765 37.4 0.680

C-TC-C7 78.896 76.39 76.20 18.631 18.882 18.715 18.616 26.922 26.896 26.449 25.888 41.9 0.685

C-TC-C8 78.676 76.45 76.25 18.646 18.816 18.750 18.606 26.195 26.708 26.195 26.363 41.0 0.681

Page 205: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

205

Experiment 1 Data

Table C-5. Experiment 1 individual moisture test results.

Board Wet Weight Dry Weight Moisture ContentName (g) (g) (%)

C-BN-A1 30.930 29.104 6.3

C-BN-A2 33.803 31.584 7.0

C-BN-A3 34.633 32.388 6.9

C-BN-A4 37.938 35.531 6.8

C-BN-A5 34.247 32.027 6.9

C-BN-B1 32.690 30.870 5.9

C-BN-B2 32.261 30.200 6.8

C-BN-B3 35.770 33.514 6.7

C-BN-B4 31.160 29.177 6.8

C-BN-B5 36.053 33.777 6.7

C-BN-C1 33.335 31.519 5.8

C-BN-C2 30.999 29.028 6.8

C-BN-C3 32.890 30.840 6.6

C-BN-C4 32.230 30.223 6.6

C-BN-C5 32.119 30.060 6.8

C-C-A1 34.794 32.227 8.0

C-C-A2 34.861 32.698 6.6

C-C-A3 37.356 35.039 6.6

C-C-A5 36.389 34.305 6.1

C-C-A7 32.339 30.210 7.0

C-C-A8 37.242 35.033 6.3

C-C-A9 33.311 31.225 6.7

C-C-A10 31.525 29.607 6.5

C-C-A11 35.878 33.777 6.2

C-C-A12 31.519 29.612 6.4

C-C-B1 39.068 36.772 6.2

C-C-B2 33.048 30.913 6.9

C-C-B3 34.533 32.307 6.9

C-C-B4 35.433 33.107 7.0

C-C-B5 35.925 33.937 5.9

C-C-B6 35.172 33.314 5.6

C-C-B7 34.746 32.869 5.7

C-C-B8 33.189 31.287 6.1

C-C-B9 33.965 32.042 6.0

C-C-B10 30.389 28.419 6.9

C-C-B11 35.619 33.371 6.7

Page 206: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

206

Appendix C

Board Wet Weight Dry Weight Moisture ContentName (g) (g) (%)

C-C-B12 36.893 34.783 6.1

C-C-B13 34.672 32.541 6.5

C-C-B14 37.850 35.687 6.1

C-C-B15 30.277 28.518 6.2

C-C-B16 30.630 28.859 6.1

C-C-C1 35.703 33.432 6.8

C-C-C2 38.401 36.106 6.4

C-C-C3 36.818 34.428 6.9

C-C-C5 36.686 34.293 7.0

C-C-C6 34.425 32.638 5.5

C-C-C7 36.855 34.995 5.3

C-C-C8 32.838 31.110 5.6

C-C-C9 30.972 29.262 5.8

C-C-C10 29.802 28.163 5.8

C-C-C11 32.084 30.012 6.9

C-C-C12 33.794 31.656 6.8

C-C-C13 37.491 35.391 5.9

C-C-C14 33.781 31.737 6.4

C-C-C15 31.610 29.830 6.0

C-C-C16 35.063 33.106 5.9

C-C-C17 33.704 31.834 5.9

C-CTC-A1 33.482 31.175 7.4

C-CTC-A2 32.900 30.813 6.8

C-CTC-A3 33.754 31.685 6.5

C-CTC-A4 33.874 31.740 6.7

C-CTC-A5 30.524 28.739 6.2

C-CTC-B1 34.635 32.606 6.2

C-CTC-B2 34.806 32.728 6.3

C-CTC-B3 35.030 33.054 6.0

C-CTC-B4 33.848 31.863 6.2

C-CTC-B5 36.538 34.366 6.3

C-CTC-B6 31.895 30.054 6.1

C-CTC-B7 37.351 35.283 5.9

C-CTC-C1 30.309 28.239 7.3

C-CTC-C2 31.917 29.814 7.1

C-CTC-C3 36.273 34.085 6.4

Page 207: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

207

Experiment 1 Data

Board Wet Weight Dry Weight Moisture ContentName (g) (g) (%)

C-CTC-C4 34.239 32.141 6.5

C-CTC-C5 33.806 31.891 6.0

C-CTC-C6 34.926 32.934 6.0

C-L-A1 31.875 29.822 6.9

C-L-A2 35.250 33.121 6.4

C-L-A3 31.862 29.889 6.6

C-L-A4 33.679 31.569 6.7

C-L-A5 33.168 31.126 6.6

C-L-A6 34.738 32.620 6.5

C-L-B1 33.724 31.756 6.2

C-L-B2 35.253 33.219 6.1

C-L-B3 33.818 31.771 6.4

C-L-B4 33.468 31.346 6.8

C-L-B5 33.898 31.750 6.8

C-L-B6 36.718 34.496 6.4

C-L-B7 36.952 34.729 6.4

C-L-B8 37.352 35.124 6.3

C-L-C1 32.621 30.635 6.5

C-L-C2 31.482 29.673 6.1

C-L-C3 28.550 26.829 6.4

C-L-C4 37.055 35.101 5.6

C-L-C5 33.733 31.695 6.4

C-L-C6 34.915 32.807 6.4

C-L-C7 37.068 34.845 6.4

C-S-A1 32.851 30.786 6.7

C-S-A2 33.661 31.573 6.6

C-S-A3 33.478 31.420 6.5

C-S-A4 35.765 33.713 6.1

C-S-A5 35.899 33.847 6.1

C-S-A6 31.162 29.336 6.2

C-S-B1 36.452 34.348 6.1

C-S-B2 29.332 27.687 5.9

C-S-B3 34.422 32.444 6.1

C-S-B4 33.587 31.750 5.8

C-S-B5 36.162 34.234 5.6

C-S-B6 35.957 34.061 5.6

Page 208: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

208

Appendix C

Board Wet Weight Dry Weight Moisture ContentName (g) (g) (%)

C-S-B7 37.062 35.003 5.9

C-S-B8 33.794 31.894 6.0

C-S-B9 35.844 33.823 6.0

C-S-C1 37.301 35.373 5.5

C-S-C2 35.102 33.235 5.6

C-S-C3 31.506 29.765 5.8

C-S-C4 36.316 34.409 5.5

C-S-C5 34.554 32.692 5.7

C-S-C6 32.807 30.945 6.0

C-S-C7 33.625 31.882 5.5

C-S-C8 34.603 32.845 5.4

C-S-C9 32.538 30.833 5.5

C-S-C10 31.949 30.160 5.9

C-S-C11 34.574 32.659 5.9

C-S-C12 34.313 32.351 6.1

C-TC-A1 40.827 38.397 6.3

C-TC-A2 35.368 33.206 6.5

C-TC-A3 32.296 30.250 6.8

C-TC-A5 33.059 31.154 6.1

C-TC-A6 33.240 31.319 6.1

C-TC-B1 34.403 32.033 7.4

C-TC-B2 36.244 34.077 6.4

C-TC-B3 35.075 32.828 6.8

C-TC-B4 33.904 31.538 7.5

C-TC-B5 34.453 32.507 6.0

C-TC-B6 32.834 30.982 6.0

C-TC-B7 33.299 31.427 6.0

C-TC-C1 34.377 32.180 6.8

C-TC-C2 31.418 29.320 7.2

C-TC-C4 37.344 35.068 6.5

C-TC-C5 36.102 33.803 6.8

C-TC-C6 32.024 30.243 5.9

C-TC-C7 34.760 32.865 5.8

C-TC-C8 34.751 32.797 6.0

Page 209: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

209

Experiment 1 Data

Table C-6. Experiment 1 individual average board density test results.

Weight Width Length Thickness (mm) Dry DensityBoard Name (g) (mm) (mm) 1 2 3 4 (g/cm3)

C-BN-A1 1577.9 356.4 356.1 21.9 22.2 22.0 22.0 0.529

C-BN-A2 1618.8 356.3 356.1 22.6 22.8 22.5 22.9 0.523

C-BN-A3 1640.9 356.1 356.0 19.8 20.9 21.3 20.3 0.586

C-BN-A4 1668.4 356.4 356.2 21.0 20.6 21.0 21.2 0.585

C-BN-A5 1644.8 356.2 356.2 20.0 20.5 20.9 20.6 0.588

C-BN-B1 1595.4 356.4 356.1 18.3 18.5 18.7 18.5 0.640

C-BN-B2 1618.8 356.1 355.9 18.3 18.4 18.6 18.5 0.645

C-BN-B3 1654.0 356.0 356.1 18.3 18.3 18.7 18.5 0.659

C-BN-B4 1605.0 356.2 356.4 18.4 18.5 18.6 18.5 0.637

C-BN-B5 1634.1 356.2 356.1 18.4 18.5 18.9 18.5 0.646

C-BN-C1 1585.2 356.0 356.2 18.3 18.5 18.6 18.5 0.638

C-BN-C2 1605.2 356.1 356.3 18.3 18.3 18.5 18.4 0.642

C-BN-C3 1645.5 356.1 356.1 18.3 18.6 18.5 18.5 0.656

C-BN-C4 1641.0 356.2 356.0 18.2 18.4 18.5 18.5 0.656

C-BN-C5 1623.7 356.1 356.0 18.3 18.5 18.7 18.5 0.646

C-C-A1 1635.8 355.8 355.7 19.2 19.1 18.9 19.2 0.623

C-C-A2 1652.5 355.9 355.6 20.8 20.6 20.5 20.8 0.590

C-C-A3 1661.9 356.0 355.5 20.3 19.9 19.4 21.0 0.609

C-C-A5 1615.4 356.1 356.3 19.5 20.3 20.7 20.9 0.588

C-C-A7 1615.9 356.4 356.4 21.2 21.2 22.1 21.5 0.550

C-C-A8 1648.6 356.1 356.2 21.2 20.8 20.4 21.1 0.583

C-C-A9 1600.7 356.1 356.1 20.2 20.9 20.6 20.1 0.575

C-C-A10 1589.6 355.9 355.8 19.6 19.5 19.4 19.8 0.600

C-C-A11 1625.3 356.0 355.8 20.1 20.3 20.4 20.3 0.594

C-C-A12 1651.0 356.0 356.3 21.3 21.6 21.9 21.8 0.563

C-C-B1 1704.0 356.1 355.8 19.1 18.7 18.7 18.8 0.670

C-C-B2 1629.0 355.9 355.9 18.7 18.7 18.4 18.7 0.643

C-C-B3 1689.0 355.7 355.5 18.9 18.7 18.5 18.9 0.663

C-C-B4 1629.0 355.8 355.1 18.5 18.7 18.8 18.7 0.641

C-C-B5 1623.1 355.7 356.3 18.6 18.6 19.0 18.7 0.643

C-C-B6 1674.5 356.3 356.3 18.6 18.6 18.8 18.7 0.667

C-C-B7 1655.0 356.5 356.5 18.5 18.7 18.9 18.7 0.657

C-C-B8 1615.6 355.9 355.8 18.3 18.6 18.6 18.6 0.647

C-C-B9 1602.8 356.2 355.8 18.3 18.5 18.6 18.5 0.644

C-C-B10 1598.0 356.2 355.9 18.6 18.7 18.8 18.9 0.625

C-C-B11 1634.4 356.4 356.3 18.4 18.5 18.7 18.5 0.648

C-C-B12 1678.6 356.1 356.1 18.8 18.8 18.6 18.8 0.663

Page 210: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

210

Appendix C

Weight Width Length Thickness (mm) Dry DensityBoard Name (g) (mm) (mm) 1 2 3 4 (g/cm3)

C-C-B13 1602.4 356.1 356.1 18.8 18.9 19.0 19.0 0.623

C-C-B14 1607.7 356.0 355.8 18.3 18.4 18.5 18.6 0.646

C-C-B15 1616.2 356.2 356.1 18.4 18.7 18.8 18.7 0.641

C-C-B16 1614.8 356.2 355.9 18.6 18.8 18.9 18.8 0.636

C-C-C1 1645.0 355.7 355.9 18.4 18.5 18.7 18.7 0.652

C-C-C2 1662.0 355.9 355.7 18.7 18.5 18.5 18.5 0.663

C-C-C3 1673.0 355.8 356.1 18.7 18.7 18.4 18.7 0.660

C-C-C5 1602.0 355.9 355.6 18.2 18.4 18.5 18.5 0.639

C-C-C6 1641.9 356.3 356.4 18.4 18.6 18.7 18.6 0.657

C-C-C7 1663.3 356.3 356.4 18.5 18.6 18.7 18.6 0.667

C-C-C8 1654.6 356.2 356.5 18.3 18.6 18.7 18.6 0.663

C-C-C9 1613.7 355.9 355.3 18.3 18.1 18.4 18.6 0.655

C-C-C10 1589.9 356.2 356.4 18.2 18.5 18.5 18.5 0.640

C-C-C11 1589.4 356.5 356.1 18.3 18.5 18.5 18.4 0.633

C-C-C12 1612.5 356.3 356.2 18.4 18.5 18.6 18.5 0.641

C-C-C13 1621.7 356.2 356.2 18.6 18.5 18.4 18.6 0.649

C-C-C14 1596.6 356.1 356.1 18.6 18.3 18.5 19.2 0.632

C-C-C15 1644.1 356.1 356.1 18.2 18.4 18.6 18.4 0.663

C-C-C16 1668.1 355.9 356.1 18.4 18.5 18.7 18.7 0.667

C-C-C17 1651.8 355.8 356.2 18.4 18.6 18.7 18.6 0.660

C-CTC-A1 1593.6 356.0 356.0 19.2 19.3 19.3 19.2 0.605

C-CTC-A2 1636.6 356.3 356.4 19.8 20.2 19.9 20.0 0.601

C-CTC-A3 1641.1 355.9 356.3 20.4 21.1 20.6 20.3 0.587

C-CTC-A4 1614.5 356.2 356.5 22.1 21.8 21.0 21.4 0.551

C-CTC-A5 1640.0 355.7 356.1 21.0 20.9 20.2 20.7 0.587

C-CTC-B1 1630.8 356.0 355.9 18.6 18.7 18.8 18.8 0.645

C-CTC-B2 1642.5 355.9 356.2 18.7 18.8 18.9 18.8 0.644

C-CTC-B3 1628.2 356.0 356.0 18.7 18.9 19.1 19.1 0.638

C-CTC-B4 1658.2 356.2 356.1 18.4 18.8 18.7 18.6 0.658

C-CTC-B5 1644.2 356.0 356.2 18.4 18.6 18.8 18.7 0.652

C-CTC-B6 1629.5 356.4 356.4 18.8 18.7 18.5 18.8 0.643

C-CTC-B7 1676.8 356.0 356.6 18.8 18.7 18.4 18.7 0.667

C-CTC-C1 1585.7 356.1 356.1 18.3 18.5 18.7 18.5 0.626

C-CTC-C2 1620.6 356.0 356.2 18.3 18.5 18.7 18.5 0.642

C-CTC-C3 1629.6 356.0 356.5 18.4 18.7 19.0 18.7 0.643

C-CTC-C4 1643.3 356.0 356.0 18.3 18.6 18.8 18.5 0.653

C-CTC-C5 1601.6 356.0 356.1 18.7 18.6 18.4 18.6 0.639

Page 211: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

211

Experiment 1 Data

Weight Width Length Thickness (mm) Dry DensityBoard Name (g) (mm) (mm) 1 2 3 4 (g/cm3)

C-CTC-C6 1627.3 356.1 356.1 18.8 18.6 18.6 18.7 0.645

C-L-A1 1620.8 356.2 356.1 20.6 20.4 20.8 20.5 0.578

C-L-A2 1665.9 356.3 356.0 20.4 20.8 20.8 20.7 0.595

C-L-A3 1644.3 356.3 355.6 20.1 20.3 20.5 20.4 0.596

C-L-A4 1626.2 356.1 356.1 20.7 20.9 20.4 20.1 0.583

C-L-A5 1631.5 356.2 356.5 21.1 20.1 19.5 20.1 0.594

C-L-A6 1680.2 356.2 356.1 20.5 20.2 19.9 19.8 0.617

C-L-B1 1605.5 356.3 356.0 18.6 18.8 18.9 18.8 0.632

C-L-B2 1626.5 356.2 356.3 18.6 18.8 19.0 18.9 0.639

C-L-B3 1654.0 356.4 356.2 18.6 18.8 19.0 19.0 0.646

C-L-B4 1635.0 356.1 356.2 18.5 18.7 18.8 18.6 0.645

C-L-B5 1605.0 355.9 356.1 18.4 18.7 18.9 18.6 0.634

C-L-B6 1643.8 356.3 356.1 18.7 18.7 18.5 18.7 0.649

C-L-B7 1683.6 356.1 356.4 18.9 18.7 18.6 18.8 0.662

C-L-B8 1655.2 356.1 356.6 18.7 18.7 18.5 18.6 0.655

C-L-C1 1665.5 356.2 356.4 18.4 18.8 18.9 18.7 0.655

C-L-C2 1646.1 356.3 356.5 18.3 18.8 19.0 18.6 0.651

C-L-C3 1654.3 356.4 356.1 18.4 18.6 18.9 18.7 0.654

C-L-C4 1627.5 356.2 356.2 18.2 18.4 18.5 18.5 0.659

C-L-C5 1636.3 356.3 356.0 18.8 18.6 18.4 18.7 0.648

C-L-C6 1649.5 356.1 356.4 18.6 18.6 18.3 18.6 0.657

C-L-C7 1656.2 356.1 356.2 18.6 18.5 18.5 18.7 0.658

C-S-A1 1646.8 356.2 356.3 19.9 20.1 20.3 19.2 0.609

C-S-A2 1643.3 356.1 356.4 19.8 20.1 20.6 20.5 0.597

C-S-A3 1620.8 355.9 356.2 20.1 20.4 20.4 20.2 0.589

C-S-A4 1618.5 356.0 356.0 20.5 20.6 21.1 20.6 0.579

C-S-A5 1645.7 356.0 355.9 20.9 20.5 20.9 21.0 0.586

C-S-A6 1614.9 356.0 355.9 20.2 20.5 20.9 20.6 0.582

C-S-B1 1634.0 355.8 356.0 18.5 18.7 19.0 18.5 0.649

C-S-B2 1599.8 355.8 356.1 18.1 18.4 18.6 18.2 0.647

C-S-B3 1628.2 355.9 355.9 17.9 18.4 18.4 18.1 0.663

C-S-B4 1643.5 356.1 355.9 18.7 19.0 19.2 18.9 0.645

C-S-B5 1660.7 356.1 356.4 18.7 18.9 19.3 19.0 0.651

C-S-B6 1624.6 356.2 356.2 18.7 18.8 19.0 18.9 0.641

C-S-B7 1635.3 355.9 356.0 18.5 18.7 18.9 18.7 0.650

C-S-B8 1620.3 355.9 356.1 18.5 18.8 18.9 18.7 0.642

C-S-B9 1627.9 356.2 356.1 18.5 18.8 18.9 18.7 0.645

Page 212: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

212

Appendix C

Weight Width Length Thickness (mm) Dry DensityBoard Name (g) (mm) (mm) 1 2 3 4 (g/cm3)

C-S-C1 1630.1 355.9 356.0 18.0 18.6 18.7 18.2 0.662

C-S-C2 1636.1 355.8 356.2 17.6 18.2 18.3 18.0 0.676

C-S-C3 1624.4 356.0 356.1 17.8 18.4 18.4 18.1 0.664

C-S-C4 1660.0 356.2 356.0 18.7 18.9 19.1 18.9 0.655

C-S-C5 1663.4 356.2 356.2 18.7 19.1 18.9 18.8 0.655

C-S-C6 1656.9 356.2 356.4 18.2 18.2 18.4 18.4 0.670

C-S-C7 1656.5 356.2 356.0 18.5 18.7 18.6 18.6 0.664

C-S-C8 1647.0 356.2 356.3 18.6 18.7 18.7 18.6 0.658

C-S-C9 1646.5 356.0 356.1 18.5 18.7 18.6 18.7 0.659

C-S-C10 1637.4 355.8 356.1 18.3 18.6 18.8 18.6 0.654

C-S-C11 1643.1 356.0 356.0 18.5 18.7 18.9 18.7 0.652

C-S-C12 1627.2 356.2 356.2 18.5 18.7 18.8 18.6 0.646

C-TC-A1 1654.6 356.3 356.2 20.0 19.9 20.2 19.9 0.610

C-TC-A2 1655.6 356.1 356.3 20.3 19.9 20.6 19.9 0.604

C-TC-A3 1643.6 356.1 356.3 19.7 19.7 20.0 19.5 0.613

C-TC-A5 1644.1 356.1 356.0 19.7 20.1 20.6 20.4 0.602

C-TC-A6 1626.4 356.1 356.1 19.6 19.8 20.4 20.2 0.602

C-TC-B1 1621.3 355.9 355.3 18.7 18.8 19.0 19.0 0.628

C-TC-B2 1630.7 355.9 355.2 18.3 18.5 18.7 18.6 0.652

C-TC-B3 1624.1 355.9 356.1 18.6 18.9 19.0 18.8 0.634

C-TC-B4 1596.4 356.4 356.6 18.6 18.8 18.9 18.8 0.618

C-TC-B5 1567.4 356.1 355.8 18.4 18.5 18.8 18.6 0.626

C-TC-B6 1641.7 355.9 356.1 18.6 18.8 18.8 18.8 0.649

C-TC-B7 1627.0 355.9 356.2 18.6 18.6 18.9 18.8 0.644

C-TC-C1 1640.1 355.8 355.9 18.5 18.9 19.0 18.8 0.642

C-TC-C2 1619.6 356.0 355.3 18.5 18.7 18.9 18.8 0.635

C-TC-C4 1604.0 356.5 356.1 18.5 18.7 18.8 18.6 0.634

C-TC-C5 1628.6 356.5 356.6 18.4 18.7 18.7 18.7 0.641

C-TC-C6 1602.9 355.8 355.9 18.2 18.5 18.5 18.4 0.648

C-TC-C7 1621.6 356.0 356.1 18.5 18.6 18.8 18.6 0.647

C-TC-C8 1621.5 356.1 356.1 18.4 18.7 18.7 18.6 0.647

Page 213: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

213

Experiment 2 Data

Appendix D. Experiment 2 Data

Appendix D contains Experiment 2 data. This includes internal bond and moisture

test results.

Table D-1. Individual Experiment 2 internal bond test results.

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm 3)

C2-BN-B1 1 29.053 50.1 50.3 18.1 0.375 149 0.598

C2-BN-B1 2 28.544 50.1 50.1 18.2 0.314 125 0.589

C2-BN-B1 3 31.436 50.2 50.2 18.3 0.776 308 0.641

C2-BN-B1 4 29.993 50.2 50.1 18.3 0.846 337 0.614

C2-BN-B1 5 31.400 50.1 50.2 18.3 1.026 407 0.641

C2-BN-B1 6 31.111 50.0 50.2 18.4 0.449 179 0.634

C2-BN-B1 7 31.888 49.5 50.1 18.5 0.564 227 0.652

C2-BN-B1 8 28.854 50.0 50.2 18.3 0.303 121 0.593

C2-BN-B1 9 29.336 50.2 50.3 18.3 0.790 313 0.596

C2-BN-B1 10 31.746 50.2 50.3 18.5 0.817 324 0.641

C2-BN-B1 11 29.782 50.2 50.2 18.4 0.815 323 0.605

C2-BN-B1 12 32.276 50.1 50.3 18.5 0.843 334 0.653

C2-BN-B1 13 32.956 49.5 50.3 18.6 0.473 190 0.669

C2-BN-B1 14 30.906 50.1 50.3 18.6 0.536 213 0.621

C2-BN-B1 15 31.234 50.1 50.2 18.6 0.687 273 0.630

C2-BN-B1 16 31.231 50.1 50.4 18.6 0.595 235 0.626

C2-BN-B1 17 32.875 50.4 50.3 18.5 1.052 415 0.662

C2-BN-B1 18 32.887 50.2 50.2 18.6 0.887 352 0.661

C2-BN-B1 19 31.709 49.7 50.1 18.7 0.750 301 0.641

C2-BN-B1 20 30.434 50.1 50.0 18.9 0.157 63 0.605

C2-BN-B1 21 32.208 50.3 50.0 18.7 0.540 215 0.643

C2-BN-B1 22 31.726 50.1 50.1 18.5 0.644 256 0.643

C2-BN-B1 23 32.825 50.1 50.2 18.6 0.880 350 0.660

C2-BN-B1 24 32.244 50.2 50.1 18.7 0.699 278 0.645

Page 214: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

214

Appendix D

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm 3)

C2-BN-B1 25 33.435 50.1 50.3 18.9 0.263 104 0.660

C2-BN-B2 1 29.853 50.1 50.2 18.2 0.781 310 0.614

C2-BN-B2 2 29.190 50.1 50.2 18.2 0.816 324 0.601

C2-BN-B2 3 30.876 50.1 50.1 18.2 0.882 351 0.636

C2-BN-B2 4 30.847 50.3 50.2 18.1 0.755 299 0.634

C2-BN-B2 5 30.638 50.2 50.1 18.2 0.499 199 0.630

C2-BN-B2 6 29.559 50.2 50.1 18.2 0.579 230 0.608

C2-BN-B2 7 29.405 49.5 50.1 18.2 0.482 194 0.612

C2-BN-B2 8 31.157 50.1 50.1 18.1 0.704 280 0.644

C2-BN-B2 9 32.353 50.2 50.2 18.2 0.935 371 0.664

C2-BN-B2 10 29.819 50.2 50.2 18.1 0.891 353 0.614

C2-BN-B2 11 31.319 50.2 50.4 18.4 0.865 342 0.635

C2-BN-B2 12 27.996 50.1 50.2 18.4 0.576 229 0.571

C2-BN-B2 13 29.762 49.9 50.2 18.4 0.633 253 0.609

C2-BN-B2 14 23.293 50.2 50.2 16.5 0.257 102 0.529

C2-BN-B2 15 31.137 50.2 50.2 18.3 0.782 311 0.636

C2-BN-B2 16 31.713 50.2 50.3 18.5 0.887 351 0.640

C2-BN-B2 17 31.336 50.4 50.3 18.4 0.783 309 0.632

C2-BN-B2 18 30.575 50.2 50.2 18.4 0.679 270 0.623

C2-BN-B2 19 31.935 49.7 50.4 18.4 0.833 333 0.654

C2-BN-B2 20 29.290 49.9 50.1 18.8 0.044 17 0.587

C2-BN-B2 21 29.856 50.2 50.3 18.5 0.474 188 0.603

C2-BN-B2 22 30.480 50.2 50.4 18.5 0.583 230 0.614

C2-BN-B2 23 29.598 50.2 50.3 18.5 0.606 240 0.596

C2-BN-B2 24 32.490 50.1 50.3 18.6 0.615 244 0.653

C2-BN-B2 25 33.072 49.4 50.1 18.7 0.291 117 0.671

C2-BN-B3 1 32.943 50.1 50.3 18.2 0.526 208 0.676

C2-BN-B3 2 28.795 50.2 50.2 18.3 0.247 98 0.590

C2-BN-B3 3 30.914 50.2 50.1 18.2 0.805 320 0.637

C2-BN-B3 4 30.617 50.3 50.2 18.3 0.667 264 0.627

C2-BN-B3 5 31.458 50.2 50.2 18.3 0.802 318 0.643

C2-BN-B3 6 32.341 50.2 50.2 18.3 0.860 341 0.663

Page 215: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

215

Experiment 2 Data

Board Sample Weight Width Length ThicknessPeak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm 3)

C2-BN-B3 7 30.397 48.8 50.2 18.4 0.521 213 0.637

C2-BN-B3 8 29.812 50.0 50.3 18.4 0.365 145 0.608

C2-BN-B3 9 30.981 50.2 50.4 18.2 0.952 376 0.633

C2-BN-B3 10 29.956 50.3 50.5 18.2 0.753 296 0.611

C2-BN-B3 11 30.300 50.2 50.5 18.3 0.712 281 0.616

C2-BN-B3 12 31.842 50.2 50.3 18.3 0.670 265 0.649

C2-BN-B3 13 29.863 49.2 50.2 18.3 0.271 110 0.622

C2-BN-B3 14 27.805 50.2 50.1 18.3 0.190 75 0.570

C2-BN-B3 15 30.260 50.1 50.3 18.2 0.498 198 0.621

C2-BN-B3 16 31.742 50.2 50.2 18.4 0.836 332 0.646

C2-BN-B3 17 34.173 50.1 50.4 18.5 0.882 349 0.691

C2-BN-B3 18 31.677 50.1 50.3 18.4 0.530 210 0.646

C2-BN-B3 19 31.897 49.6 50.2 18.6 0.401 161 0.651

C2-BN-B3 20 27.772 50.2 50.3 18.5 0.046 18 0.562

C2-BN-B3 21 27.554 50.2 50.0 18.5 0.096 38 0.561

C2-BN-B3 22 32.360 50.3 50.1 18.6 0.380 151 0.654

C2-BN-B3 23 32.018 50.2 50.4 18.5 0.298 118 0.645

C2-BN-B3 24 32.823 50.0 50.3 18.7 0.196 78 0.660

C2-BN-B3 25 31.914 50.1 50.2 19.0 0.115 46 0.631

C2-BN-B4 1 31.655 50.0 49.9 19.6 0.479 192 0.609

C2-BN-B4 2 30.572 50.0 49.8 18.4 0.392 157 0.629

C2-BN-B4 3 31.638 50.0 49.8 18.2 0.775 311 0.655

C2-BN-B4 4 31.450 49.9 49.9 18.2 0.718 289 0.653

C2-BN-B4 5 31.301 50.0 50.0 18.3 0.878 352 0.645

C2-BN-B4 6 33.947 49.9 50.1 18.2 0.795 318 0.701

C2-BN-B4 7 30.058 50.1 49.9 18.5 0.247 99 0.610

C2-BN-B4 8 31.733 49.9 49.9 18.3 0.831 334 0.653

C2-BN-B4 9 32.874 50.0 49.9 18.4 0.816 327 0.674

C2-BN-B4 10 32.762 49.9 49.8 18.3 0.897 361 0.678

C2-BN-B4 11 34.122 49.9 49.7 18.2 0.852 344 0.711

C2-BN-B4 12 31.483 49.8 49.8 18.1 0.739 298 0.658

C2-BN-B4 13 29.708 50.3 49.9 18.2 0.283 113 0.609

Page 216: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

216

Appendix D

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm 3)

C2-BN-B4 14 33.726 49.9 49.9 18.4 0.768 308 0.690

C2-BN-B4 15 33.959 50.0 49.9 18.3 0.888 356 0.699

C2-BN-B4 16 33.260 49.7 49.9 18.4 0.929 375 0.685

C2-BN-B4 17 32.431 50.0 50.0 18.3 0.728 291 0.664

C2-BN-B4 18 32.860 49.9 50.0 18.3 0.757 303 0.677

C2-BN-B4 19 27.516 50.5 49.9 17.6 0.143 57 0.584

C2-BN-B4 20 32.093 49.9 49.8 18.7 0.385 155 0.651

C2-BN-B4 21 33.496 49.9 49.7 18.6 0.809 326 0.683

C2-BN-B4 22 33.035 50.0 49.9 18.5 0.670 268 0.671

C2-BN-B4 23 30.371 49.9 49.8 18.5 0.720 290 0.622

C2-BN-B4 24 31.986 49.9 49.9 18.5 0.638 256 0.653

C2-BN-B4 25 31.063 50.6 50.0 18.8 0.144 57 0.613

C2-BN-B5 1 30.767 50.0 49.9 18.2 0.481 193 0.637

C2-BN-B5 2 30.657 49.9 49.9 18.2 0.399 160 0.635

C2-BN-B5 3 30.977 49.9 49.7 18.1 0.735 296 0.648

C2-BN-B5 4 31.518 49.9 49.9 18.1 0.654 263 0.659

C2-BN-B5 5 31.319 50.0 49.9 18.2 0.860 345 0.648

C2-BN-B5 6 31.525 49.9 49.9 18.2 0.737 296 0.656

C2-BN-B5 7 31.625 50.4 50.0 18.3 0.792 314 0.644

C2-BN-B5 8 29.450 49.9 49.9 18.2 0.439 176 0.609

C2-BN-B5 9 27.730 49.9 49.9 18.1 0.748 300 0.579

C2-BN-B5 10 31.243 49.9 50.1 18.2 0.688 275 0.645

C2-BN-B5 11 30.732 49.9 49.9 18.2 0.845 339 0.639

C2-BN-B5 12 32.280 49.9 50.1 18.1 0.475 190 0.673

C2-BN-B5 13 32.658 50.3 50.0 18.4 0.869 346 0.665

C2-BN-B5 14 28.905 49.8 50.0 18.2 0.279 112 0.601

C2-BN-B5 15 28.691 49.8 49.8 18.2 0.437 176 0.597

C2-BN-B5 16 28.798 49.9 49.9 17.3 0.430 173 0.629

C2-BN-B5 17 31.573 49.9 50.0 18.2 0.629 252 0.654

C2-BN-B5 18 32.500 49.9 50.1 18.3 0.757 303 0.669

C2-BN-B5 19 33.934 50.5 50.0 18.4 0.829 328 0.686

C2-BN-B5 20 28.843 49.9 49.9 18.6 0.158 63 0.585

Page 217: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

217

Experiment 2 Data

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm 3)

C2-BN-B5 21 29.976 49.8 49.8 18.6 0.244 98 0.611

C2-BN-B5 22 32.273 50.0 49.8 18.4 0.431 173 0.661

C2-BN-B5 23 32.829 50.0 49.8 18.5 0.561 225 0.670

C2-BN-B5 24 32.477 49.8 49.8 18.5 0.559 225 0.665

C2-BN-B5 25 32.013 50.7 49.9 18.6 0.314 124 0.637

C2-BN-B6 1 27.456 49.9 49.9 18.3 0.285 115 0.566

C2-BN-B6 2 28.103 49.9 49.9 18.2 0.358 144 0.583

C2-BN-B6 3 30.682 50.0 49.9 18.2 0.722 290 0.635

C2-BN-B6 4 29.294 50.0 49.9 18.3 0.682 273 0.602

C2-BN-B6 5 30.629 49.9 50.0 18.3 0.699 280 0.632

C2-BN-B6 6 31.807 49.9 50.1 18.4 0.754 302 0.650

C2-BN-B6 7 32.583 50.4 50.0 18.4 0.659 261 0.659

C2-BN-B6 8 27.835 50.0 50.0 18.3 0.388 155 0.571

C2-BN-B6 9 29.823 49.9 49.9 18.3 0.527 212 0.615

C2-BN-B6 10 32.754 49.9 49.9 18.4 0.744 299 0.674

C2-BN-B6 11 34.397 50.0 49.9 18.4 0.934 374 0.702

C2-BN-B6 12 32.217 49.9 50.0 18.3 0.781 313 0.662

C2-BN-B6 13 31.857 50.5 50.0 18.5 0.743 294 0.642

C2-BN-B6 14 28.952 49.9 49.9 18.5 0.349 140 0.592

C2-BN-B6 15 32.282 49.9 49.8 18.4 0.782 315 0.664

C2-BN-B6 16 31.762 50.0 50.0 18.4 0.773 310 0.652

C2-BN-B6 17 33.693 49.8 50.0 18.5 0.885 356 0.689

C2-BN-B6 18 34.991 50.0 49.9 18.5 1.007 404 0.711

C2-BN-B6 19 36.280 50.6 50.1 18.7 1.010 399 0.722

C2-BN-B6 20 33.121 49.9 49.9 18.7 0.374 150 0.669

C2-BN-B6 21 32.111 49.9 49.9 18.6 0.595 239 0.654

C2-BN-B6 22 31.058 49.9 49.8 18.6 0.624 251 0.632

C2-BN-B6 23 32.714 50.0 49.9 18.6 0.589 236 0.662

C2-BN-B6 24 33.613 49.9 50.0 18.6 0.585 235 0.680

C2-BN-B6 25 36.583 50.5 49.9 18.8 0.542 215 0.726

C2-BN-B7 1 33.298 51.2 51.2 18.3 0.930 354 0.653

C2-BN-B7 2 31.006 51.2 51.2 18.3 0.750 286 0.610

Page 218: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

218

Appendix D

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm 3)

C2-BN-B7 3 33.006 51.2 51.1 18.3 0.906 346 0.651

C2-BN-B7 4 31.991 51.3 51.2 18.3 0.806 307 0.626

C2-BN-B7 5 33.652 51.3 51.2 18.3 1.093 417 0.659

C2-BN-B7 6 32.939 51.2 51.2 18.3 0.954 364 0.648

C2-BN-B7 7 31.857 51.2 51.3 18.3 0.793 302 0.623

C2-BN-B7 8 30.500 51.2 51.2 18.3 0.618 236 0.601

C2-BN-B7 9 33.202 51.2 51.2 18.3 0.929 355 0.652

C2-BN-B7 10 31.560 51.3 51.1 18.4 0.691 264 0.618

C2-BN-B7 11 32.699 51.2 51.2 18.4 0.847 323 0.639

C2-BN-B7 12 33.051 51.2 51.2 18.4 0.977 372 0.646

C2-BN-B7 13 31.668 51.1 51.2 18.5 0.620 237 0.617

C2-BN-B7 14 31.323 51.2 51.3 18.4 0.539 205 0.610

C2-BN-B7 15 32.465 51.2 51.3 18.4 0.770 294 0.634

C2-BN-B7 16 33.434 51.2 51.3 18.5 0.748 284 0.646

C2-BN-B7 17 33.887 51.2 51.4 18.5 0.734 279 0.656

C2-BN-B7 18 29.909 51.2 51.3 18.4 0.559 213 0.584

C2-BN-B7 19 33.843 51.1 51.3 18.5 0.702 268 0.656

C2-BN-B7 21 31.863 51.2 51.2 18.6 0.347 133 0.614

C2-BN-B7 22 32.713 51.3 51.1 18.6 0.514 196 0.633

C2-BN-B7 23 32.766 51.1 51.3 18.6 0.635 242 0.633

C2-BN-B7 24 34.334 51.3 51.1 18.6 0.605 231 0.663

C2-BN-B7 25 35.192 51.1 51.2 18.9 0.348 133 0.670

C2-BN-B8 1 31.564 51.2 51.4 18.1 0.753 286 0.624

C2-BN-B8 2 30.236 51.1 51.2 18.1 0.883 338 0.603

C2-BN-B8 3 30.161 51.2 51.2 18.1 0.780 297 0.597

C2-BN-B8 4 32.336 51.3 51.2 18.2 0.638 243 0.638

C2-BN-B8 5 33.181 51.3 51.2 18.2 0.893 340 0.653

C2-BN-B8 6 32.474 51.2 51.3 18.2 0.942 359 0.640

C2-BN-B8 7 32.479 51.2 51.2 18.3 0.706 269 0.638

C2-BN-B8 8 30.259 51.3 51.2 18.2 0.748 285 0.597

C2-BN-B8 9 31.962 51.2 51.1 18.2 0.916 350 0.630

C2-BN-B8 10 31.934 51.2 51.3 18.2 0.896 341 0.628

Page 219: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

219

Experiment 2 Data

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm 3)

C2-BN-B8 11 33.237 51.2 51.2 18.3 0.855 326 0.651

C2-BN-B8 12 33.827 51.2 51.3 18.3 0.966 368 0.664

C2-BN-B8 13 31.618 51.2 51.3 18.3 0.686 261 0.619

C2-BN-B8 14 33.652 51.2 51.2 18.3 0.958 365 0.658

C2-BN-B8 15 31.732 51.1 51.2 18.2 0.738 282 0.626

C2-BN-B8 16 32.406 51.2 51.2 18.3 0.863 330 0.636

C2-BN-B8 17 32.628 51.3 51.2 18.3 0.677 258 0.640

C2-BN-B8 18 34.146 51.3 51.2 18.3 0.807 307 0.669

C2-BN-B8 19 32.868 51.1 51.3 18.4 0.574 219 0.641

C2-BN-B8 20 33.139 51.2 51.1 18.5 0.535 204 0.644

C2-BN-B8 21 32.961 51.3 51.1 18.4 0.511 195 0.642

C2-BN-B8 22 34.426 51.3 51.2 18.4 0.800 305 0.670

C2-BN-B8 23 33.301 51.2 51.1 18.4 0.841 322 0.651

C2-BN-B8 24 33.115 51.2 51.1 18.5 0.513 196 0.646

C2-BN-B8 25 32.253 51.2 51.2 18.5 0.395 151 0.625

C2-BN-B9 1 32.880 51.4 51.3 18.2 0.612 232 0.643

C2-BN-B9 2 34.209 51.3 51.2 18.2 0.944 359 0.671

C2-BN-B9 3 33.542 51.2 51.2 18.2 0.907 346 0.664

C2-BN-B9 4 31.946 51.2 51.2 18.2 0.745 284 0.629

C2-BN-B9 5 33.222 51.1 51.3 18.3 0.950 362 0.651

C2-BN-B9 6 32.308 51.3 51.3 18.2 0.884 336 0.633

C2-BN-B9 7 31.990 51.2 51.3 18.3 0.525 200 0.625

C2-BN-B9 8 32.463 51.3 51.3 18.2 0.749 285 0.637

C2-BN-B9 9 32.658 51.2 51.3 18.2 0.935 356 0.641

C2-BN-B9 10 30.835 51.2 51.2 18.3 0.863 329 0.603

C2-BN-B9 11 31.053 51.3 51.3 18.4 0.843 320 0.603

C2-BN-B9 12 34.622 51.3 51.3 18.4 1.022 388 0.673

C2-BN-B9 13 32.283 51.2 51.2 18.4 0.730 278 0.631

C2-BN-B9 14 32.569 51.3 51.1 18.3 0.790 302 0.639

C2-BN-B9 15 31.077 51.2 51.2 18.3 0.721 276 0.611

C2-BN-B9 16 31.456 51.1 51.2 18.5 0.785 300 0.611

C2-BN-B9 17 33.280 51.3 51.3 18.4 1.026 390 0.646

Page 220: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

220

Appendix D

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm3)

C2-BN-B9 18 34.142 51.3 51.3 18.4 1.127 429 0.664

C2-BN-B9 19 32.947 51.3 51.4 18.5 0.656 249 0.636

C2-BN-B9 20 31.916 51.2 51.1 18.5 0.570 218 0.620

C2-BN-B9 21 32.539 51.3 51.2 18.4 0.759 289 0.633

C2-BN-B9 22 33.033 51.2 51.3 18.5 0.953 363 0.641

C2-BN-B9 23 32.653 51.1 51.2 18.5 0.767 293 0.635

C2-BN-B9 24 32.171 51.2 51.2 18.5 0.541 206 0.623

C2-BN-B9 25 31.382 51.2 51.3 18.5 0.442 168 0.607

C2-BN-B10 3 34.012 51.0 51.0 18.0 1.262 485 0.676

C2-BN-B10 4 33.195 50.9 50.9 18.2 1.262 487 0.653

C2-BN-B10 5 33.848 50.9 50.9 18.3 1.258 486 0.664

C2-BN-B10 6 31.853 51.0 50.9 18.3 0.765 295 0.623

C2-BN-B10 9 33.766 51.1 50.9 18.2 1.372 527 0.664

C2-BN-B10 10 32.935 50.9 50.8 18.2 1.313 507 0.649

C2-BN-B10 11 32.986 51.0 51.0 18.2 0.679 261 0.649

C2-BN-B10 12 32.171 51.1 50.9 18.2 1.254 482 0.632

C2-BN-B10 15 34.213 51.2 51.0 18.2 1.173 449 0.668

C2-BN-B10 16 32.193 50.9 50.9 18.2 1.057 408 0.634

C2-BN-B10 17 32.784 51.0 50.9 18.3 1.161 448 0.641

C2-BN-B10 18 31.502 51.0 50.8 18.2 0.934 361 0.621

C2-BN-B11 3 34.833 51.0 50.8 18.3 1.088 420 0.682

C2-BN-B11 4 34.532 51.1 51.4 18.6 1.225 466 0.655

C2-BN-B11 5 33.325 50.9 51.0 18.5 1.000 386 0.645

C2-BN-B11 6 32.930 50.9 50.9 18.5 0.860 332 0.638

C2-BN-B11 9 33.968 50.9 51.2 18.6 1.151 442 0.652

C2-BN-B11 10 33.226 51.2 51.1 18.6 1.059 405 0.637

C2-BN-B11 11 32.930 50.9 50.9 18.4 1.237 477 0.642

C2-BN-B11 12 32.030 51.0 50.9 18.4 1.094 421 0.623

C2-BN-B11 15 32.151 51.3 51.6 18.7 1.135 430 0.606

C2-BN-B11 16 33.373 51.0 51.0 18.5 1.081 417 0.646

C2-BN-B11 17 33.811 50.9 50.9 18.4 0.943 364 0.658

C2-BN-B11 18 32.964 51.3 51.1 18.5 0.840 320 0.630

Page 221: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

221

Experiment 2 Data

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm 3)

C2-BN-B12 3 34.088 50.9 50.9 18.5 1.006 389 0.662

C2-BN-B12 4 33.173 51.0 51.0 18.6 0.969 373 0.638

C2-BN-B12 5 33.674 51.0 51.1 18.6 1.081 415 0.645

C2-BN-B12 6 34.499 51.0 51.1 18.5 1.257 482 0.664

C2-BN-B12 9 35.268 51.1 50.9 18.4 1.251 482 0.684

C2-BN-B12 10 35.014 51.0 50.9 18.5 1.320 508 0.678

C2-BN-B12 11 34.078 50.8 51.0 18.5 1.307 505 0.661

C2-BN-B12 12 34.276 51.2 51.1 18.5 0.844 323 0.659

C2-BN-B12 15 36.551 51.0 51.1 18.6 1.199 460 0.699

C2-BN-B12 16 36.219 51.0 51.0 18.5 1.178 454 0.699

C2-BN-B12 17 34.337 50.8 50.9 18.6 0.984 380 0.664

C2-BN-B12 18 34.811 50.9 50.9 18.6 0.963 372 0.672

C2-BN-B13 3 30.747 51.0 50.9 17.3 1.256 484 0.638

C2-BN-B13 4 30.835 51.0 51.0 17.2 0.989 381 0.643

C2-BN-B13 5 32.683 51.0 50.9 17.4 1.491 574 0.677

C2-BN-B13 6 31.417 50.9 50.9 17.4 1.057 407 0.649

C2-BN-B13 9 32.322 50.9 50.9 17.4 1.177 454 0.669

C2-BN-B13 10 29.882 50.9 50.9 17.1 1.073 414 0.631

C2-BN-B13 11 30.747 51.0 50.9 17.3 1.194 460 0.640

C2-BN-B13 12 27.274 51.0 51.0 16.9 0.724 279 0.579

C2-BN-B13 15 30.734 51.0 50.9 17.4 1.110 428 0.634

C2-BN-B13 16 31.502 51.0 51.0 17.5 0.913 352 0.649

C2-BN-B13 17 31.028 51.0 51.0 17.7 0.917 353 0.632

C2-BN-B13 18 32.767 50.9 51.0 17.6 1.135 438 0.672

C2-BN-B14 3 30.363 51.0 50.9 17.0 0.970 374 0.643

C2-BN-B14 4 31.027 51.0 51.0 17.4 1.171 451 0.641

C2-BN-B14 5 31.509 50.9 50.9 17.4 1.041 401 0.651

C2-BN-B14 6 30.374 51.0 50.9 17.4 1.072 413 0.626

C2-BN-B14 9 31.498 50.9 50.9 17.4 1.386 536 0.652

C2-BN-B14 10 32.453 51.0 50.8 17.4 1.159 448 0.672

C2-BN-B14 11 30.846 50.9 51.0 17.5 1.084 418 0.633

C2-BN-B14 12 29.369 51.0 50.9 17.1 0.900 346 0.615

Page 222: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

222

Appendix D

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm 3)

C2-BN-B14 15 31.378 50.9 51.1 17.4 0.884 340 0.647

C2-BN-B14 16 30.167 50.9 50.9 17.2 0.976 376 0.630

C2-BN-B14 17 31.816 51.0 51.0 17.5 1.215 468 0.654

C2-BN-B14 18 30.741 50.9 51.0 17.5 0.636 245 0.630

C2-BN-B15 3 30.435 51.0 50.9 17.3 1.169 451 0.631

C2-BN-B15 4 31.195 51.0 50.9 17.5 1.225 472 0.642

C2-BN-B15 5 32.033 51.0 50.9 18.0 1.179 454 0.640

C2-BN-B15 6 30.902 51.0 50.9 17.7 0.954 368 0.628

C2-BN-B15 9 30.812 51.0 50.9 17.6 1.223 471 0.630

C2-BN-B15 10 31.119 50.9 51.0 17.8 1.188 457 0.629

C2-BN-B15 11 29.973 51.0 51.0 17.4 0.937 361 0.617

C2-BN-B15 12 30.941 51.0 51.0 17.8 1.227 472 0.624

C2-BN-B15 15 31.435 50.9 50.9 17.6 1.157 446 0.642

C2-BN-B15 16 33.219 50.9 51.0 17.9 1.132 436 0.667

C2-BN-B15 17 32.765 51.0 50.9 18.0 1.065 411 0.657

C2-BN-B15 18 28.355 51.0 51.0 17.3 0.818 315 0.588

C2-C-B4 1 30.753 49.8 50.0 18.5 0.551 221 0.626

C2-C-B4 2 29.256 49.9 50.0 18.6 0.580 233 0.595

C2-C-B4 3 28.940 50.2 50.1 18.7 0.653 260 0.578

C2-C-B4 4 32.018 49.9 49.8 18.7 1.016 409 0.649

C2-C-B4 5 35.334 49.9 49.9 18.6 0.956 385 0.718

C2-C-B4 6 32.343 49.8 49.9 18.6 0.689 278 0.660

C2-C-B4 7 32.037 51.0 50.0 18.8 0.625 245 0.630

C2-C-B4 8 31.296 49.9 49.8 18.7 0.635 255 0.633

C2-C-B4 9 32.286 49.9 49.9 18.6 0.775 311 0.654

C2-C-B4 10 31.827 50.0 50.0 18.7 0.614 246 0.642

C2-C-B4 11 32.852 49.9 49.9 18.6 0.835 335 0.665

C2-C-B4 12 33.423 50.0 49.9 18.7 0.869 348 0.675

C2-C-B4 13 31.664 51.1 49.9 18.8 0.559 220 0.622

C2-C-B4 14 30.050 49.8 49.8 18.9 0.331 133 0.602

C2-C-B4 15 31.412 49.9 49.9 18.7 0.595 239 0.633

C2-C-B4 16 35.006 50.0 49.8 18.8 0.761 306 0.702

Page 223: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

223

Experiment 2 Data

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm 3)

C2-C-B4 17 35.553 50.0 49.9 18.8 0.709 285 0.714

C2-C-B4 18 35.436 49.9 50.0 18.8 0.928 372 0.711

C2-C-B4 19 32.923 51.2 50.0 18.9 0.747 292 0.640

C2-C-B4 20 27.981 49.9 49.9 19.4 0.062 25 0.546

C2-C-B4 21 32.227 50.0 49.9 19.2 0.376 151 0.634

C2-C-B4 22 32.316 50.0 49.9 19.1 0.347 139 0.641

C2-C-B4 23 34.672 49.8 49.8 19.0 0.705 285 0.693

C2-C-B4 24 34.914 49.9 49.7 19.0 0.624 251 0.696

C2-C-B4 25 35.104 51.3 49.9 19.2 0.614 240 0.674

C2-C-B5 1 30.091 49.8 49.9 18.3 0.607 245 0.625

C2-C-B5 2 31.567 49.9 49.8 18.4 0.692 279 0.650

C2-C-B5 3 29.783 49.9 49.9 18.3 0.699 280 0.615

C2-C-B5 4 32.094 49.9 49.9 18.3 0.860 345 0.662

C2-C-B5 5 30.449 49.9 49.8 18.3 1.047 421 0.630

C2-C-B5 6 29.819 49.8 49.9 18.3 0.804 324 0.619

C2-C-B5 7 32.147 50.8 49.9 18.4 0.789 311 0.648

C2-C-B5 8 29.689 49.9 49.9 18.3 0.559 224 0.613

C2-C-B5 9 29.989 49.9 49.8 18.3 0.790 318 0.622

C2-C-B5 10 30.552 49.9 49.8 18.5 0.732 294 0.627

C2-C-B5 11 29.671 49.8 49.9 18.5 0.691 278 0.609

C2-C-B5 12 31.964 49.9 49.9 18.4 0.787 316 0.657

C2-C-B5 13 33.612 50.7 49.9 18.7 0.906 358 0.668

C2-C-B5 14 28.677 49.9 49.8 18.5 0.459 185 0.586

C2-C-B5 15 29.853 50.0 49.9 18.6 0.873 350 0.607

C2-C-B5 16 29.371 49.7 49.9 18.6 0.738 297 0.599

C2-C-B5 17 29.818 49.8 49.9 18.6 0.696 280 0.609

C2-C-B5 18 31.001 49.7 49.9 18.6 0.824 332 0.633

C2-C-B5 19 35.405 51.1 49.8 18.8 0.816 321 0.695

C2-C-B5 20 29.656 49.9 49.9 18.9 0.301 121 0.593

C2-C-B5 21 31.249 49.9 49.9 18.7 0.877 353 0.634

C2-C-B5 22 33.095 50.0 49.7 18.8 0.728 293 0.668

C2-C-B5 23 30.650 49.9 49.8 18.7 0.525 211 0.621

Page 224: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

224

Appendix D

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm 3)

C2-C-B5 24 34.351 49.9 49.8 18.8 0.778 313 0.692

C2-C-B5 25 35.098 51.1 50.1 19.1 0.511 200 0.675

C2-C-B6 1 30.485 49.7 49.8 18.4 0.476 192 0.631

C2-C-B6 2 31.809 50.0 49.7 18.5 0.588 237 0.653

C2-C-B6 3 32.092 49.9 49.8 18.4 0.678 273 0.662

C2-C-B6 4 30.124 49.9 49.8 18.5 0.656 264 0.618

C2-C-B6 5 31.714 50.0 49.9 18.5 0.612 246 0.646

C2-C-B6 6 32.618 49.9 49.7 18.6 0.798 321 0.666

C2-C-B6 7 31.584 50.5 49.6 18.7 0.618 247 0.636

C2-C-B6 8 32.870 49.8 49.8 18.6 0.544 219 0.672

C2-C-B6 9 33.992 49.8 49.8 18.5 0.726 293 0.695

C2-C-B6 10 33.490 50.0 49.7 18.6 0.755 304 0.681

C2-C-B6 11 33.107 50.0 49.8 18.5 0.823 331 0.676

C2-C-B6 12 32.884 49.9 49.8 18.4 0.646 260 0.678

C2-C-B6 13 32.936 50.9 49.7 18.6 0.855 338 0.657

C2-C-B6 14 28.692 49.9 49.9 18.5 0.234 94 0.586

C2-C-B6 15 30.853 49.9 49.7 18.5 0.523 211 0.635

C2-C-B6 16 32.366 49.9 49.7 18.5 0.713 287 0.662

C2-C-B6 17 33.840 49.9 49.7 18.5 0.775 313 0.694

C2-C-B6 18 33.807 49.9 49.6 18.5 0.816 329 0.695

C2-C-B6 19 33.390 50.8 49.7 18.7 0.629 249 0.664

C2-C-B6 20 29.598 49.8 49.2 18.7 0.163 67 0.607

C2-C-B6 21 30.759 49.8 49.4 18.6 0.386 157 0.632

C2-C-B6 22 31.139 49.9 49.4 18.7 0.508 206 0.637

C2-C-B6 23 33.160 49.9 49.4 18.8 0.731 297 0.675

C2-C-B6 24 32.913 49.8 49.4 18.8 0.486 198 0.670

C2-C-B6 25 34.452 51.0 49.5 19.0 0.402 160 0.676

C2-C-B7 1 31.574 49.8 50.0 18.4 0.600 241 0.649

C2-C-B7 2 30.484 49.9 49.8 18.3 0.411 166 0.631

C2-C-B7 3 31.145 50.0 49.8 18.3 0.658 264 0.644

C2-C-B7 4 31.391 49.9 49.9 18.4 0.717 288 0.647

C2-C-B7 5 31.910 49.9 49.9 18.3 0.745 300 0.662

Page 225: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

225

Experiment 2 Data

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm 3)

C2-C-B7 6 31.970 49.9 50.1 18.2 0.788 315 0.664

C2-C-B7 7 31.750 50.5 50.0 18.3 0.548 217 0.649

C2-C-B7 8 30.751 49.9 50.0 18.5 0.642 257 0.628

C2-C-B7 9 31.149 49.9 50.0 18.4 0.641 257 0.639

C2-C-B7 10 31.798 50.0 49.9 18.4 0.530 212 0.652

C2-C-B7 11 32.014 50.2 50.1 18.3 0.806 321 0.658

C2-C-B7 12 32.344 49.9 49.9 18.2 0.856 344 0.672

C2-C-B7 13 31.259 50.4 50.0 18.3 0.578 229 0.638

C2-C-B7 14 34.371 50.0 50.0 18.6 0.739 296 0.697

C2-C-B7 15 33.935 50.0 50.0 18.4 0.876 350 0.693

C2-C-B7 16 32.133 49.9 50.0 18.4 0.672 269 0.660

C2-C-B7 17 33.761 50.0 49.9 18.5 0.913 366 0.690

C2-C-B7 18 32.501 50.0 50.0 18.4 0.806 323 0.666

C2-C-B7 19 31.420 50.3 49.9 18.5 0.625 249 0.637

C2-C-B7 20 33.819 50.1 49.9 18.7 0.586 235 0.681

C2-C-B7 21 32.715 49.8 49.9 18.5 0.642 258 0.670

C2-C-B7 22 33.568 50.0 49.9 18.6 0.664 266 0.681

C2-C-B7 23 34.174 50.0 49.8 18.7 0.574 231 0.691

C2-C-B7 24 34.239 50.0 49.8 18.7 0.613 246 0.693

C2-C-B7 25 31.606 50.6 49.9 19.0 0.155 62 0.622

C2-C-B8 1 28.186 49.8 49.9 18.2 0.362 146 0.589

C2-C-B8 2 30.879 50.0 50.0 18.3 0.663 265 0.637

C2-C-B8 3 31.537 49.9 49.7 18.1 0.913 368 0.664

C2-C-B8 4 31.740 50.0 49.6 18.2 0.735 297 0.663

C2-C-B8 5 32.404 50.0 49.8 18.2 0.683 274 0.675

C2-C-B8 6 29.305 49.9 50.1 18.1 0.695 278 0.609

C2-C-B8 7 30.155 50.6 50.1 18.3 0.609 240 0.613

C2-C-B8 8 31.435 50.0 49.9 18.2 0.527 211 0.652

C2-C-B8 9 31.288 49.8 50.0 18.2 0.659 264 0.650

C2-C-B8 10 33.585 49.9 50.0 18.3 1.097 440 0.693

C2-C-B8 11 31.135 49.9 49.9 18.3 0.705 283 0.644

C2-C-B8 12 32.164 49.9 49.8 18.3 0.942 379 0.666

Page 226: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

226

Appendix D

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm 3)

C2-C-B8 13 32.531 50.6 49.9 18.4 0.934 370 0.661

C2-C-B8 14 31.783 50.0 49.8 18.2 0.751 302 0.659

C2-C-B8 15 33.457 50.0 49.9 18.3 0.804 322 0.689

C2-C-B8 16 33.828 49.9 50.0 18.4 0.704 282 0.695

C2-C-B8 17 32.622 50.0 50.1 18.3 0.477 190 0.670

C2-C-B8 18 33.599 50.0 49.8 18.4 0.573 230 0.689

C2-C-B8 19 31.401 50.3 49.9 18.5 0.468 187 0.635

C2-C-B8 20 32.616 49.9 49.9 18.5 0.486 195 0.667

C2-C-B8 21 34.451 49.8 49.8 18.6 0.917 370 0.701

C2-C-B8 22 33.093 49.9 49.7 18.6 0.697 281 0.674

C2-C-B8 23 32.999 49.9 49.9 18.6 0.664 267 0.670

C2-C-B8 24 34.793 50.0 50.1 18.8 0.750 300 0.697

C2-C-B8 25 36.023 50.7 50.0 19.0 0.629 248 0.705

C2-C-B9 1 31.826 49.9 50.0 18.3 0.539 216 0.657

C2-C-B9 2 32.907 50.0 49.9 18.4 0.772 310 0.674

C2-C-B9 3 31.305 50.0 50.0 18.3 0.680 272 0.647

C2-C-B9 4 31.772 49.9 49.8 18.4 0.704 283 0.652

C2-C-B9 5 31.752 49.9 50.0 18.4 0.589 236 0.651

C2-C-B9 6 31.264 50.0 50.0 18.4 0.692 276 0.641

C2-C-B9 7 28.465 50.3 50.0 18.4 0.501 199 0.579

C2-C-B9 8 31.131 50.0 49.9 18.4 0.584 234 0.639

C2-C-B9 9 31.966 49.8 49.9 18.3 0.822 331 0.664

C2-C-B9 10 31.813 49.9 49.9 18.5 0.624 250 0.651

C2-C-B9 11 32.421 49.8 49.8 18.5 0.750 302 0.664

C2-C-B9 12 30.806 49.9 49.7 18.5 0.604 244 0.632

C2-C-B9 13 30.746 50.5 49.9 18.5 0.424 168 0.619

C2-C-B9 14 29.089 50.0 49.9 18.5 0.459 184 0.595

C2-C-B9 15 31.066 49.9 49.8 18.6 0.608 245 0.635

C2-C-B9 16 32.732 50.0 49.9 18.6 0.762 305 0.663

C2-C-B9 17 33.885 49.9 49.9 18.6 0.748 300 0.689

C2-C-B9 18 33.935 49.8 49.9 18.5 0.845 340 0.694

C2-C-B9 19 31.071 50.4 49.8 18.6 0.590 235 0.626

Page 227: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

227

Experiment 2 Data

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm 3)

C2-C-B9 20 29.810 49.9 49.8 18.8 0.358 144 0.601

C2-C-B9 21 30.710 49.9 49.8 18.8 0.474 191 0.621

C2-C-B9 22 30.488 49.8 49.7 18.8 0.508 205 0.615

C2-C-B9 23 31.285 49.9 49.8 18.7 0.633 255 0.634

C2-C-B9 24 33.097 49.9 49.8 18.7 0.624 252 0.671

C2-C-B9 25 34.302 50.5 50.0 19.1 0.352 140 0.673

C2-C-B10 1 30.071 51.1 51.3 18.5 0.380 145 0.584

C2-C-B10 2 34.182 51.2 51.3 18.3 0.810 308 0.668

C2-C-B10 3 33.633 51.0 51.2 18.3 0.829 317 0.662

C2-C-B10 4 33.141 50.9 51.2 18.4 0.722 277 0.650

C2-C-B10 5 33.586 51.1 51.1 18.4 0.782 300 0.658

C2-C-B10 6 32.507 51.2 51.3 18.4 0.846 323 0.634

C2-C-B10 7 29.978 51.1 51.3 18.4 0.422 161 0.584

C2-C-B10 8 32.295 51.2 51.1 18.4 0.724 277 0.631

C2-C-B10 9 34.003 51.2 50.9 18.3 0.645 247 0.670

C2-C-B10 10 35.168 51.2 51.1 18.4 0.847 324 0.687

C2-C-B10 11 34.584 51.1 51.1 18.4 0.968 371 0.677

C2-C-B10 12 32.564 51.1 51.3 18.4 0.701 267 0.635

C2-C-B10 13 31.402 51.1 51.1 18.5 0.604 231 0.612

C2-C-B10 14 31.111 51.1 51.0 18.4 0.767 294 0.608

C2-C-B10 15 33.419 51.2 51.1 18.5 0.863 330 0.647

C2-C-B10 16 34.642 51.1 51.1 18.5 0.923 354 0.673

C2-C-B10 17 32.326 51.2 51.1 18.5 0.701 268 0.627

C2-C-B10 18 32.090 51.2 51.3 18.4 0.660 252 0.624

C2-C-B10 19 32.013 51.2 51.4 18.5 0.654 249 0.617

C2-C-B10 20 31.499 51.3 51.1 18.8 0.428 163 0.601

C2-C-B10 21 31.232 51.1 51.0 18.6 0.472 181 0.604

C2-C-B10 22 33.898 50.9 51.1 18.5 0.531 204 0.662

C2-C-B10 23 32.688 51.2 51.1 18.5 0.630 241 0.635

C2-C-B10 24 33.338 51.2 51.0 18.6 0.639 245 0.647

C2-C-B10 25 33.407 51.1 51.1 18.6 0.620 237 0.646

C2-C-B11 1 34.102 51.2 51.2 18.2 0.736 281 0.675

Page 228: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

228

Appendix D

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm 3)

C2-C-B11 2 34.103 51.1 51.0 18.1 0.771 296 0.679

C2-C-B11 3 29.679 51.2 51.1 18.1 0.767 293 0.590

C2-C-B11 4 29.379 51.2 51.1 18.2 0.643 246 0.582

C2-C-B11 5 31.838 51.2 51.1 18.3 0.787 301 0.627

C2-C-B11 6 30.688 51.2 51.2 18.1 0.776 296 0.609

C2-C-B11 7 31.496 51.2 51.1 18.2 0.673 257 0.623

C2-C-B11 8 31.827 51.1 51.1 18.1 0.923 354 0.636

C2-C-B11 9 31.367 51.1 51.1 18.1 0.870 333 0.626

C2-C-B11 10 31.120 51.3 51.0 18.1 0.938 358 0.620

C2-C-B11 11 31.454 51.2 51.0 18.2 0.796 305 0.623

C2-C-B11 12 32.486 51.1 50.9 18.2 0.845 325 0.648

C2-C-B11 13 32.286 51.3 51.1 18.3 0.709 271 0.635

C2-C-B11 14 32.590 51.1 51.0 18.3 0.726 279 0.644

C2-C-B11 15 32.825 51.0 51.0 18.2 0.770 296 0.653

C2-C-B11 16 34.170 51.2 51.0 18.4 0.937 359 0.670

C2-C-B11 17 33.380 51.3 51.1 18.3 0.950 363 0.657

C2-C-B11 18 33.768 51.2 51.2 18.3 0.968 370 0.665

C2-C-B11 19 33.498 51.2 50.9 18.4 0.748 287 0.658

C2-C-B11 20 34.238 51.1 51.1 18.4 0.765 293 0.670

C2-C-B11 21 34.731 51.2 51.2 18.5 0.844 322 0.675

C2-C-B11 22 34.388 51.1 51.0 18.4 0.979 375 0.673

C2-C-B11 23 35.140 51.0 51.1 18.4 0.911 350 0.689

C2-C-B11 24 34.479 51.1 51.0 18.4 0.900 345 0.677

C2-C-B11 25 33.141 51.1 51.1 18.5 0.609 233 0.644

C2-C-B12 1 32.759 51.1 51.1 18.3 0.687 263 0.644

C2-C-B12 2 31.826 51.1 50.9 18.3 0.612 235 0.630

C2-C-B12 3 32.463 51.2 51.3 18.3 0.889 339 0.637

C2-C-B12 4 32.115 51.0 51.2 18.4 0.551 211 0.629

C2-C-B12 5 31.448 51.2 51.1 18.3 0.760 291 0.617

C2-C-B12 6 32.451 51.2 51.1 18.3 0.675 258 0.637

C2-C-B12 7 32.407 51.2 51.0 18.4 0.481 184 0.634

C2-C-B12 8 32.781 51.0 51.1 18.3 0.603 232 0.648

Page 229: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

229

Experiment 2 Data

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm3)

C2-C-B12 9 32.149 51.3 50.9 18.2 0.734 281 0.635

C2-C-B12 10 32.219 51.1 51.1 18.4 0.552 212 0.632

C2-C-B12 11 32.432 51.2 51.1 18.2 0.792 303 0.639

C2-C-B12 12 34.513 51.1 51.1 18.3 0.960 368 0.680

C2-C-B12 13 32.422 51.1 51.0 18.5 0.645 247 0.631

C2-C-B12 14 31.390 51.2 51.1 18.5 0.454 174 0.610

C2-C-B12 15 33.387 51.1 51.3 18.4 0.639 244 0.650

C2-C-B12 16 33.424 51.4 51.2 18.5 0.778 296 0.646

C2-C-B12 17 35.649 51.1 51.0 18.5 0.906 348 0.696

C2-C-B12 18 34.936 51.1 51.1 18.5 0.700 268 0.681

C2-C-B12 19 35.516 51.2 51.2 18.6 0.815 311 0.686

C2-C-B12 20 30.474 51.3 51.1 18.8 0.119 45 0.582

C2-C-B12 21 30.674 51.0 50.9 18.6 0.284 109 0.596

C2-C-B12 22 33.240 51.2 51.1 18.6 0.634 243 0.644

C2-C-B12 23 32.885 51.2 51.1 18.5 0.720 275 0.637

C2-C-B12 24 34.794 51.2 51.1 18.5 0.557 213 0.675

C2-C-B12 25 33.960 51.2 51.3 18.9 0.335 128 0.645

C2-C-B13 3 33.377 50.9 50.8 18.0 1.075 416 0.667

C2-C-B13 4 31.823 50.9 50.8 18.2 0.689 267 0.630

C2-C-B13 5 31.044 50.9 50.8 18.0 0.778 301 0.622

C2-C-B13 6 34.384 50.9 50.8 18.3 0.979 378 0.675

C2-C-B13 9 32.423 51.0 50.9 18.1 1.086 419 0.643

C2-C-B13 10 32.745 50.9 50.9 18.3 0.971 375 0.646

C2-C-B13 11 31.705 51.0 50.9 18.6 0.510 196 0.613

C2-C-B13 12 31.317 50.9 50.8 18.1 1.005 388 0.622

C2-C-B13 15 31.924 50.9 50.9 18.4 0.848 327 0.622

C2-C-B13 16 32.514 51.0 50.9 18.5 0.774 298 0.630

C2-C-B13 17 33.314 50.9 50.9 18.0 1.119 433 0.665

C2-C-B13 18 33.353 50.9 50.9 18.6 0.816 315 0.644

C2-C-B14 3 34.656 50.9 50.9 18.3 0.907 350 0.683

C2-C-B14 4 33.999 50.9 50.9 18.2 1.050 405 0.671

C2-C-B14 5 31.695 50.9 50.9 18.3 0.673 260 0.623

Page 230: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

230

Appendix D

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm 3)

C2-C-B14 6 31.504 50.9 50.9 18.3 0.970 375 0.619

C2-C-B14 9 32.260 50.9 50.9 18.3 0.926 358 0.637

C2-C-B14 10 32.467 50.9 50.9 18.3 1.025 395 0.640

C2-C-B14 11 31.575 50.9 50.8 18.2 0.949 367 0.626

C2-C-B14 12 32.158 50.9 50.9 18.1 0.944 365 0.640

C2-C-B14 15 33.526 50.9 50.9 18.3 1.161 449 0.660

C2-C-B14 16 33.735 50.9 50.8 18.4 1.006 389 0.660

C2-C-B14 17 31.519 50.9 50.9 18.3 0.878 339 0.620

C2-C-B14 18 33.126 50.9 50.9 18.3 0.810 313 0.652

C2-C-B15 3 32.717 50.9 50.8 18.2 1.019 394 0.647

C2-C-B15 4 33.745 50.9 50.9 18.2 1.083 418 0.669

C2-C-B15 5 32.989 50.9 50.9 18.2 0.996 385 0.653

C2-C-B15 6 33.578 50.9 50.8 18.1 0.993 384 0.667

C2-C-B15 9 30.888 50.9 50.7 18.1 0.728 282 0.614

C2-C-B15 10 32.568 50.9 50.8 18.1 1.083 419 0.649

C2-C-B15 11 32.816 50.9 50.9 18.3 0.892 344 0.645

C2-C-B15 12 33.449 50.9 50.9 18.3 0.969 374 0.657

C2-C-B15 15 30.984 50.9 50.8 18.3 0.778 301 0.610

C2-C-B15 16 34.054 50.9 50.9 18.3 0.996 385 0.669

C2-C-B15 17 31.499 50.9 50.8 18.3 0.507 196 0.618

C2-C-B15 18 32.437 50.9 50.9 18.3 0.795 307 0.638

C2-C-B16 3 32.595 50.9 50.8 17.8 0.936 362 0.662

C2-C-B16 4 29.905 50.9 50.7 17.8 0.846 328 0.608

C2-C-B16 5 31.600 50.8 50.9 17.8 0.995 385 0.640

C2-C-B16 6 32.304 50.9 50.9 18.0 1.025 396 0.648

C2-C-B16 9 32.093 50.8 50.8 18.0 0.916 355 0.644

C2-C-B16 10 31.888 50.9 50.7 18.1 0.418 162 0.636

C2-C-B16 11 33.743 50.9 50.9 18.2 0.819 316 0.668

C2-C-B16 12 31.619 51.0 51.0 17.9 0.773 298 0.633

C2-C-B16 15 34.758 50.7 50.8 18.1 0.938 364 0.693

C2-C-B16 16 29.977 50.9 50.7 17.5 0.897 347 0.617

C2-C-B16 17 32.512 50.9 50.8 18.0 1.106 428 0.653

Page 231: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

231

Experiment 2 Data

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm 3)

C2-C-B16 18 32.908 50.9 50.9 18.3 1.060 409 0.648

C2-C-B17 3 31.667 50.9 50.7 17.6 0.933 362 0.651

C2-C-B17 4 30.848 50.9 50.8 17.7 0.828 320 0.629

C2-C-B17 5 32.193 50.9 50.9 17.8 1.158 447 0.654

C2-C-B17 6 30.778 50.8 50.8 17.7 1.055 409 0.629

C2-C-B17 9 31.225 50.9 51.0 17.7 1.071 413 0.636

C2-C-B17 10 33.283 51.0 50.9 17.5 1.522 587 0.684

C2-C-B17 11 31.701 50.9 50.9 17.7 1.183 457 0.646

C2-C-B17 12 29.974 50.9 50.9 17.7 1.077 416 0.611

C2-C-B17 15 32.006 51.0 50.7 17.9 0.908 351 0.646

C2-C-B17 16 32.953 50.8 50.8 17.8 1.307 506 0.670

C2-C-B17 17 32.676 50.8 51.0 17.9 1.107 427 0.658

C2-C-B17 18 30.719 50.9 50.8 17.9 1.092 422 0.620

C2-C-B18 3 32.779 51.0 50.8 17.8 1.069 413 0.664

C2-C-B18 4 32.537 50.9 50.9 17.7 1.208 467 0.665

C2-C-B18 5 29.812 51.0 51.0 17.5 0.871 335 0.612

C2-C-B18 6 32.024 50.9 50.8 17.6 1.001 387 0.656

C2-C-B18 9 33.398 50.9 50.8 17.9 1.206 467 0.674

C2-C-B18 10 31.910 50.9 50.7 17.6 1.073 415 0.655

C2-C-B18 11 31.171 50.8 50.7 17.6 1.002 389 0.641

C2-C-B18 12 31.809 50.9 50.8 17.9 0.837 324 0.641

C2-C-B18 15 33.043 50.9 50.8 17.8 1.053 408 0.670

C2-C-B18 16 31.688 50.9 50.9 17.9 1.233 476 0.637

C2-C-B18 17 33.397 50.9 50.9 17.9 1.023 394 0.673

C2-C-B18 18 30.260 51.1 50.8 17.9 0.800 308 0.607

C2-CTC-B2 1 31.700 50.0 50.3 18.3 0.774 308 0.649

C2-CTC-B2 2 30.891 50.4 50.4 18.2 0.570 224 0.628

C2-CTC-B2 3 31.234 50.2 50.6 18.2 0.811 319 0.637

C2-CTC-B2 4 30.994 50.2 50.3 18.2 0.816 323 0.634

C2-CTC-B2 5 32.158 50.1 50.4 18.3 0.647 256 0.655

C2-CTC-B2 6 32.121 50.3 50.3 18.2 0.809 320 0.657

C2-CTC-B2 7 31.749 49.5 50.4 18.4 0.425 170 0.651

Page 232: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

232

Appendix D

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm 3)

C2-CTC-B2 8 29.305 50.1 50.2 18.1 0.510 203 0.604

C2-CTC-B2 9 31.443 50.3 50.1 18.2 0.914 363 0.647

C2-CTC-B2 10 32.246 50.1 50.2 18.4 0.783 311 0.656

C2-CTC-B2 11 33.194 50.3 50.3 18.6 0.845 334 0.665

C2-CTC-B2 12 33.091 50.2 50.2 18.4 0.739 293 0.672

C2-CTC-B2 13 31.963 49.4 50.4 18.7 0.298 120 0.646

C2-CTC-B2 14 29.488 50.1 50.2 18.5 0.266 106 0.596

C2-CTC-B2 15 32.322 50.2 50.3 18.6 0.683 270 0.648

C2-CTC-B2 16 31.977 50.1 50.4 18.6 0.506 201 0.639

C2-CTC-B2 17 31.671 50.2 50.2 18.5 0.769 305 0.639

C2-CTC-B2 18 35.131 50.2 50.3 18.5 1.031 408 0.706

C2-CTC-B2 19 34.002 49.8 50.4 18.9 0.366 146 0.675

C2-CTC-B2 20 30.618 50.2 50.2 18.8 0.154 61 0.609

C2-CTC-B2 21 29.575 50.2 50.3 18.7 0.243 96 0.588

C2-CTC-B2 22 31.261 50.2 50.2 18.7 0.367 146 0.626

C2-CTC-B2 23 31.958 50.2 50.3 18.7 0.809 320 0.636

C2-CTC-B2 24 33.401 49.9 50.1 18.8 0.800 319 0.669

C2-CTC-B2 25 34.210 50.2 50.3 19.1 0.125 49 0.667

C2-CTC-B3 1 30.262 50.2 50.2 18.1 0.574 228 0.623

C2-CTC-B3 2 23.065 50.1 50.1 15.7 0.590 235 0.552

C2-CTC-B3 3 29.239 50.2 50.3 18.1 0.616 244 0.601

C2-CTC-B3 4 30.796 50.3 50.3 18.3 0.867 343 0.626

C2-CTC-B3 5 31.192 50.1 50.2 18.3 0.817 325 0.639

C2-CTC-B3 6 30.492 50.2 50.1 18.3 0.744 295 0.622

C2-CTC-B3 7 31.254 49.3 50.2 18.3 0.427 173 0.649

C2-CTC-B3 8 28.680 50.0 50.1 18.1 0.564 225 0.597

C2-CTC-B3 9 27.374 50.0 50.3 18.0 0.473 188 0.568

C2-CTC-B3 10 28.152 50.2 50.3 18.1 0.622 246 0.579

C2-CTC-B3 11 31.317 50.1 50.2 18.3 0.821 326 0.640

C2-CTC-B3 12 32.406 50.0 50.2 18.3 0.743 296 0.664

C2-CTC-B3 13 32.290 49.5 50.3 18.3 0.672 270 0.669

C2-CTC-B3 14 30.300 50.0 50.1 18.3 0.577 230 0.622

Page 233: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

233

Experiment 2 Data

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm 3)

C2-CTC-B3 15 26.977 50.1 50.2 17.9 0.595 237 0.565

C2-CTC-B3 16 28.680 50.2 50.2 18.1 0.704 279 0.592

C2-CTC-B3 17 32.006 50.1 50.3 18.3 0.689 273 0.654

C2-CTC-B3 18 33.449 50.1 50.3 18.4 0.963 382 0.680

C2-CTC-B3 19 32.615 49.7 50.3 18.5 0.665 266 0.665

C2-CTC-B3 20 30.820 50.1 50.1 18.3 0.357 143 0.632

C2-CTC-B3 21 30.396 50.2 50.0 18.4 0.481 192 0.620

C2-CTC-B3 22 29.324 50.4 50.1 18.4 0.423 167 0.593

C2-CTC-B3 23 30.445 50.2 50.1 18.4 0.596 237 0.619

C2-CTC-B3 24 33.907 49.9 50.0 18.5 0.766 307 0.692

C2-CTC-B3 25 33.953 50.1 50.3 18.7 0.501 199 0.678

C2-CTC-B4 1 30.651 50.0 49.9 18.4 0.498 200 0.627

C2-CTC-B4 2 28.435 50.1 49.9 18.4 0.375 150 0.581

C2-CTC-B4 3 29.960 50.0 49.9 18.4 0.810 325 0.614

C2-CTC-B4 4 29.545 50.0 49.9 18.5 0.752 301 0.603

C2-CTC-B4 5 30.130 50.0 50.0 18.5 0.812 325 0.615

C2-CTC-B4 6 31.730 49.8 49.9 18.5 0.875 352 0.650

C2-CTC-B4 7 30.172 50.5 50.0 18.5 0.576 228 0.607

C2-CTC-B4 8 32.287 49.9 50.0 18.5 0.721 289 0.658

C2-CTC-B4 9 31.238 50.2 50.0 18.5 0.818 326 0.633

C2-CTC-B4 10 31.790 50.0 49.9 18.5 0.797 320 0.649

C2-CTC-B4 11 30.717 49.9 50.0 18.5 0.818 328 0.626

C2-CTC-B4 12 31.830 50.0 50.0 18.5 0.923 369 0.648

C2-CTC-B4 13 31.877 50.3 50.0 18.5 0.747 297 0.646

C2-CTC-B4 14 31.785 49.8 50.0 18.6 0.656 264 0.646

C2-CTC-B4 15 33.142 50.1 50.0 18.7 1.062 424 0.664

C2-CTC-B4 16 33.409 49.9 50.1 18.5 0.833 333 0.677

C2-CTC-B4 17 33.965 50.0 49.9 18.6 1.086 436 0.688

C2-CTC-B4 18 32.002 50.1 50.0 18.7 0.676 270 0.643

C2-CTC-B4 19 32.553 50.6 49.9 18.7 0.978 388 0.650

C2-CTC-B4 20 31.622 49.9 49.9 18.9 0.325 131 0.633

C2-CTC-B4 21 31.833 50.0 49.8 18.6 0.714 286 0.644

Page 234: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

234

Appendix D

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm 3)

C2-CTC-B4 22 32.846 50.0 49.7 18.7 0.904 364 0.665

C2-CTC-B4 23 33.043 50.0 49.9 18.7 0.835 335 0.667

C2-CTC-B4 24 34.911 51.0 50.0 18.9 1.019 400 0.683

C2-CTC-B4 25 36.070 50.8 50.1 18.8 0.855 336 0.708

C2-CTC-B5 1 29.784 49.9 50.2 18.3 0.440 175 0.612

C2-CTC-B5 2 28.288 49.9 50.0 18.3 0.403 162 0.583

C2-CTC-B5 3 30.406 49.9 49.9 18.3 0.735 295 0.627

C2-CTC-B5 4 29.971 50.0 50.1 18.4 0.518 207 0.612

C2-CTC-B5 5 30.494 50.0 50.1 18.4 0.791 316 0.625

C2-CTC-B5 6 31.374 50.0 50.0 18.3 0.840 336 0.644

C2-CTC-B5 7 33.582 50.4 50.1 18.5 0.725 287 0.677

C2-CTC-B5 8 28.723 49.9 49.9 18.4 0.252 101 0.590

C2-CTC-B5 9 30.588 50.0 50.1 18.3 0.676 270 0.627

C2-CTC-B5 10 30.157 50.1 50.1 18.4 0.522 208 0.615

C2-CTC-B5 11 33.368 50.1 50.1 18.4 0.952 380 0.682

C2-CTC-B5 12 33.847 49.9 50.1 18.4 1.073 429 0.691

C2-CTC-B5 13 33.779 50.5 50.2 18.5 0.768 303 0.678

C2-CTC-B5 14 30.370 50.0 50.1 18.6 0.343 137 0.613

C2-CTC-B5 15 31.384 49.9 49.9 18.5 0.603 242 0.641

C2-CTC-B5 16 32.744 50.1 50.1 18.5 0.829 330 0.662

C2-CTC-B5 17 32.781 50.1 50.1 18.5 0.698 278 0.664

C2-CTC-B5 18 34.624 50.1 50.2 18.5 0.988 393 0.702

C2-CTC-B5 19 33.894 50.4 50.1 18.6 0.798 315 0.678

C2-CTC-B5 21 30.402 50.0 50.1 18.7 0.189 75 0.612

C2-CTC-B5 22 30.485 50.0 49.9 18.7 0.291 116 0.613

C2-CTC-B5 23 32.151 50.1 50.1 18.8 0.488 194 0.642

C2-CTC-B5 24 34.291 50.0 49.8 18.7 0.786 316 0.692

C2-CTC-B5 25 35.588 50.6 50.0 18.8 0.884 349 0.704

C2-CTC-B6 1 30.796 49.9 50.0 18.2 0.566 227 0.638

C2-CTC-B6 2 30.673 50.0 50.0 18.3 0.793 317 0.632

C2-CTC-B6 3 31.082 50.0 50.2 18.2 0.830 330 0.639

C2-CTC-B6 4 31.689 50.2 49.9 18.4 0.680 271 0.649

Page 235: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

235

Experiment 2 Data

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm 3)

C2-CTC-B6 5 30.332 49.9 50.0 18.4 0.754 302 0.621

C2-CTC-B6 6 30.473 49.9 50.1 18.5 0.639 255 0.621

C2-CTC-B6 7 30.162 50.7 49.9 18.5 0.352 139 0.605

C2-CTC-B6 8 30.403 50.1 50.0 18.3 0.738 295 0.626

C2-CTC-B6 9 31.387 50.1 50.1 18.3 0.847 337 0.645

C2-CTC-B6 10 29.859 50.1 50.1 18.4 0.740 294 0.609

C2-CTC-B6 11 31.970 50.1 50.0 18.4 0.766 305 0.651

C2-CTC-B6 12 33.076 49.9 50.2 18.4 0.913 364 0.675

C2-CTC-B6 13 31.346 50.5 50.3 18.6 0.562 222 0.626

C2-CTC-B6 14 32.702 50.2 50.1 18.5 0.791 315 0.662

C2-CTC-B6 15 30.970 49.9 50.3 18.4 0.488 194 0.631

C2-CTC-B6 16 30.371 50.0 50.1 18.4 0.769 307 0.620

C2-CTC-B6 17 33.473 50.0 50.1 18.5 0.801 320 0.680

C2-CTC-B6 18 33.445 49.9 50.1 18.5 0.924 369 0.679

C2-CTC-B6 19 35.386 50.5 50.3 18.7 0.940 370 0.703

C2-CTC-B6 20 33.045 50.0 50.0 18.8 0.319 128 0.660

C2-CTC-B6 21 30.954 49.9 50.2 18.6 0.736 293 0.625

C2-CTC-B6 22 32.474 50.1 49.8 18.6 0.690 277 0.657

C2-CTC-B6 23 33.679 50.0 50.0 18.6 0.812 325 0.682

C2-CTC-B6 24 33.974 50.1 49.9 18.7 0.857 342 0.684

C2-CTC-B6 25 33.596 50.7 50.1 18.8 0.593 233 0.661

C2-CTC-B7 1 34.210 51.1 51.0 18.4 0.744 286 0.670

C2-CTC-B7 2 32.855 51.2 51.0 18.3 0.658 252 0.648

C2-CTC-B7 3 33.511 51.1 50.9 18.3 0.789 304 0.665

C2-CTC-B7 4 31.651 51.1 51.1 18.4 0.862 330 0.619

C2-CTC-B7 5 31.038 51.1 51.1 18.4 1.038 398 0.608

C2-CTC-B7 6 33.876 51.3 50.9 18.3 0.825 316 0.666

C2-CTC-B7 7 33.220 51.1 51.2 18.5 0.733 280 0.646

C2-CTC-B7 8 31.399 51.2 51.0 18.4 0.830 318 0.617

C2-CTC-B7 9 34.629 51.2 51.1 18.4 0.898 343 0.676

C2-CTC-B7 10 33.949 51.2 51.1 18.3 0.951 364 0.667

C2-CTC-B7 11 32.899 51.1 51.1 18.3 0.929 356 0.648

Page 236: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

236

Appendix D

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm 3)

C2-CTC-B7 12 34.222 51.2 51.1 18.3 1.099 421 0.673

C2-CTC-B7 13 32.564 51.2 51.2 18.6 0.653 249 0.629

C2-CTC-B7 14 32.070 51.1 51.0 18.4 0.683 262 0.629

C2-CTC-B7 15 33.891 51.2 50.9 18.4 0.931 358 0.666

C2-CTC-B7 16 33.801 51.0 51.1 18.5 0.854 328 0.661

C2-CTC-B7 17 35.582 51.1 51.2 18.3 1.170 448 0.699

C2-CTC-B7 18 32.777 51.3 51.1 18.3 0.853 326 0.645

C2-CTC-B7 19 32.969 51.1 50.9 18.5 0.592 227 0.644

C2-CTC-B7 20 33.392 51.1 51.1 18.6 0.416 159 0.646

C2-CTC-B7 21 29.228 51.2 51.2 18.5 0.369 141 0.567

C2-CTC-B7 22 33.143 51.0 51.0 18.6 0.772 297 0.645

C2-CTC-B7 23 32.853 51.2 51.0 18.7 0.833 319 0.635

C2-CTC-B7 24 32.404 51.1 51.0 18.6 0.754 290 0.630

C2-CTC-B7 25 33.763 51.2 51.1 18.7 0.575 220 0.648

C2-CTC-B8 1 30.921 51.1 51.2 18.2 0.784 300 0.611

C2-CTC-B8 2 31.726 51.0 51.2 18.2 0.858 329 0.630

C2-CTC-B8 3 32.953 51.1 51.2 18.1 0.977 373 0.654

C2-CTC-B8 4 32.002 51.1 51.1 18.2 0.743 285 0.634

C2-CTC-B8 5 32.587 51.1 51.1 18.2 0.843 323 0.645

C2-CTC-B8 6 30.972 51.2 51.1 18.2 0.769 294 0.614

C2-CTC-B8 7 29.534 51.1 51.1 18.2 0.476 182 0.584

C2-CTC-B8 8 35.016 51.1 51.1 18.2 0.991 380 0.692

C2-CTC-B8 9 32.385 51.1 51.0 18.1 0.985 378 0.647

C2-CTC-B8 10 31.504 51.1 51.0 18.1 0.953 366 0.628

C2-CTC-B8 11 32.983 51.3 50.9 18.2 0.914 350 0.653

C2-CTC-B8 12 32.505 51.1 51.2 18.2 0.905 346 0.642

C2-CTC-B8 13 31.152 51.2 51.1 18.3 0.739 283 0.614

C2-CTC-B8 14 32.917 51.2 51.0 18.3 0.902 346 0.648

C2-CTC-B8 15 32.072 51.0 51.1 18.2 0.815 313 0.635

C2-CTC-B8 16 32.630 51.1 51.2 18.4 0.913 349 0.637

C2-CTC-B8 17 34.683 51.1 51.0 18.3 1.114 427 0.685

C2-CTC-B8 18 33.193 51.1 51.1 18.3 1.007 386 0.654

Page 237: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

237

Experiment 2 Data

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm 3)

C2-CTC-B8 19 29.777 51.2 51.0 18.4 0.712 273 0.584

C2-CTC-B8 20 32.435 51.1 51.1 18.6 0.587 225 0.630

C2-CTC-B8 21 33.546 51.0 51.0 18.4 0.781 300 0.658

C2-CTC-B8 22 30.445 51.0 50.9 18.4 0.540 208 0.601

C2-CTC-B8 23 33.037 51.1 51.0 18.4 0.667 256 0.648

C2-CTC-B8 24 33.173 51.2 51.1 18.5 0.610 233 0.646

C2-CTC-B8 25 33.368 51.2 51.2 18.6 0.624 238 0.645

C2-CTC-B9 1 30.002 51.1 51.1 18.3 0.697 267 0.590

C2-CTC-B9 2 31.520 51.2 51.0 18.2 0.772 296 0.625

C2-CTC-B9 3 32.968 51.0 51.1 18.3 0.865 332 0.652

C2-CTC-B9 4 33.645 51.2 51.0 18.4 0.886 340 0.660

C2-CTC-B9 5 34.867 51.2 51.3 18.4 1.046 399 0.680

C2-CTC-B9 6 33.264 51.2 51.1 18.3 0.868 332 0.652

C2-CTC-B9 7 33.690 51.1 51.1 18.5 0.768 294 0.656

C2-CTC-B9 8 31.753 51.1 51.1 18.3 0.861 330 0.624

C2-CTC-B9 9 33.172 51.2 51.0 18.4 0.856 328 0.650

C2-CTC-B9 10 35.518 51.2 51.0 18.4 1.270 486 0.696

C2-CTC-B9 11 33.265 51.2 51.1 18.4 0.835 319 0.652

C2-CTC-B9 12 32.279 51.1 51.0 18.3 0.920 353 0.636

C2-CTC-B9 13 34.863 51.2 51.1 18.6 0.919 352 0.675

C2-CTC-B9 14 32.281 51.1 51.3 18.4 0.524 200 0.630

C2-CTC-B9 15 34.155 51.0 51.2 18.5 0.958 367 0.666

C2-CTC-B9 16 34.409 51.0 51.1 18.5 0.916 352 0.672

C2-CTC-B9 17 36.875 51.2 51.2 18.6 1.085 414 0.712

C2-CTC-B9 18 33.911 51.1 51.0 18.5 0.937 359 0.661

C2-CTC-B9 19 33.430 51.1 51.0 18.6 0.727 279 0.648

C2-CTC-B9 20 32.096 51.2 51.0 18.5 0.693 265 0.625

C2-CTC-B9 21 31.622 50.9 51.1 18.6 0.551 212 0.616

C2-CTC-B9 22 33.315 51.1 51.1 18.6 0.663 254 0.644

C2-CTC-B9 23 33.939 51.1 51.0 18.6 0.552 212 0.659

C2-CTC-B9 24 33.935 51.2 51.2 18.7 0.765 292 0.652

C2-CTC-B9 25 32.015 51.1 51.1 18.8 0.429 164 0.614

Page 238: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

238

Appendix D

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm3)

C2-CTC-B1 3 32.613 50.9 51.0 18.5 0.857 330 0.635

C2-CTC-B1 4 33.337 50.9 51.0 18.5 1.170 451 0.647

C2-CTC-B1 5 33.317 50.9 50.8 18.5 1.323 511 0.647

C2-CTC-B1 6 33.740 51.0 50.9 18.5 1.274 491 0.655

C2-CTC-B1 9 31.261 51.0 50.8 18.3 1.020 394 0.614

C2-CTC-B1 10 33.451 50.9 50.9 18.6 1.087 420 0.648

C2-CTC-B1 11 34.002 50.9 50.9 18.6 1.297 501 0.659

C2-CTC-B1 12 32.958 50.9 50.9 18.5 0.842 325 0.641

C2-CTC-B1 15 33.601 50.9 50.9 18.5 1.119 432 0.654

C2-CTC-B1 16 31.557 50.9 50.8 18.5 0.836 323 0.615

C2-CTC-B1 17 32.089 51.0 50.9 18.5 0.752 290 0.624

C2-CTC-B1 18 34.467 50.9 50.9 18.5 1.083 418 0.671

C2-CTC-B1 3 33.128 50.9 50.8 18.0 1.190 460 0.661

C2-CTC-B1 4 30.431 50.9 50.8 17.8 0.730 282 0.614

C2-CTC-B1 5 32.525 50.9 50.9 18.2 0.957 369 0.642

C2-CTC-B1 6 34.827 50.9 50.8 18.4 1.097 424 0.680

C2-CTC-B1 9 34.307 50.9 50.9 18.1 1.058 409 0.681

C2-CTC-B1 10 32.047 50.9 50.8 18.3 1.109 429 0.629

C2-CTC-B1 11 29.802 50.9 50.8 17.7 0.908 351 0.606

C2-CTC-B1 12 29.126 50.9 50.9 17.8 0.827 320 0.588

C2-CTC-B1 15 30.818 50.9 50.8 18.0 0.789 305 0.617

C2-CTC-B1 16 33.323 50.9 50.8 18.3 1.173 454 0.655

C2-CTC-B1 17 31.004 50.9 51.0 18.1 1.017 392 0.615

C2-CTC-B1 18 31.760 50.9 50.9 18.1 1.039 402 0.630

C2-CTC-B1 3 33.658 50.9 50.9 18.3 0.953 368 0.661

C2-CTC-B1 4 32.035 50.9 50.8 18.2 0.778 301 0.633

C2-CTC-B1 5 35.493 50.9 50.8 18.5 1.319 509 0.691

C2-CTC-B1 6 33.827 50.9 50.9 18.0 1.228 475 0.675

C2-CTC-B1 9 30.691 50.9 50.8 17.7 1.056 408 0.624

C2-CTC-B1 10 32.659 50.9 50.9 18.2 1.184 457 0.645

C2-CTC-B1 11 34.160 50.9 51.0 18.4 1.227 473 0.667

C2-CTC-B1 12 31.627 50.9 50.9 18.4 0.895 346 0.620

Page 239: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

239

Experiment 2 Data

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm 3)

C2-CTC-B1 15 33.400 50.9 50.9 18.2 1.184 458 0.662

C2-CTC-B1 16 34.284 50.9 50.9 18.5 0.968 374 0.667

C2-CTC-B1 17 28.806 50.9 50.9 18.3 0.795 307 0.567

C2-CTC-B1 18 29.333 50.9 50.9 17.9 0.679 262 0.591

C2-CTC-B1 3 29.814 50.9 50.8 17.8 0.834 323 0.606

C2-CTC-B1 4 29.211 51.1 50.9 17.6 0.618 237 0.594

C2-CTC-B1 5 30.832 50.9 51.0 17.6 0.915 353 0.628

C2-CTC-B1 6 30.813 50.9 50.8 17.8 1.009 391 0.626

C2-CTC-B1 9 30.037 51.0 50.8 17.7 0.661 255 0.610

C2-CTC-B1 10 31.648 50.8 50.8 17.6 1.133 439 0.651

C2-CTC-B1 11 32.505 50.9 50.9 17.7 1.136 439 0.663

C2-CTC-B1 12 32.041 50.9 51.1 17.8 1.045 402 0.646

C2-CTC-B1 15 31.806 50.9 50.9 17.9 0.551 213 0.638

C2-CTC-B1 16 31.592 51.0 50.8 17.5 1.007 389 0.651

C2-CTC-B1 17 32.782 50.9 50.9 17.8 1.077 416 0.664

C2-CTC-B1 18 32.341 50.9 50.9 17.9 0.564 218 0.652

C2-CTC-B1 3 33.268 50.9 50.8 17.8 1.201 464 0.675

C2-CTC-B1 4 32.010 50.9 50.8 17.4 1.172 453 0.663

C2-CTC-B1 5 29.441 50.9 50.9 17.4 1.005 388 0.608

C2-CTC-B1 6 32.007 50.9 50.9 17.8 1.062 410 0.647

C2-CTC-B1 9 30.625 50.9 51.0 17.3 1.225 472 0.636

C2-CTC-B1 10 32.894 50.8 50.9 17.6 1.170 453 0.676

C2-CTC-B1 11 32.417 50.9 50.8 17.6 1.163 450 0.664

C2-CTC-B1 12 31.049 50.9 50.9 17.6 1.103 426 0.635

C2-CTC-B1 15 33.006 51.0 50.9 17.8 1.230 475 0.668

C2-CTC-B1 16 30.346 50.9 50.9 17.5 0.988 381 0.626

C2-CTC-B1 17 30.455 50.9 50.9 17.4 1.096 423 0.630

C2-CTC-B1 18 29.506 50.9 50.9 17.2 1.071 414 0.618

C2-CTC-B1 3 31.261 50.9 51.0 17.6 1.006 388 0.641

C2-CTC-B1 4 30.990 51.0 51.0 17.7 1.057 407 0.629

C2-CTC-B1 5 30.566 50.9 51.1 17.6 1.062 408 0.625

C2-CTC-B1 6 32.568 50.9 50.9 17.7 1.189 459 0.664

Page 240: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

240

Appendix D

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm 3)

C2-CTC-B1 9 30.125 50.9 50.9 17.1 0.873 337 0.633

C2-CTC-B1 10 30.395 51.0 51.0 17.8 0.922 355 0.612

C2-CTC-B1 11 31.246 51.0 50.9 17.7 1.084 418 0.636

C2-CTC-B1 12 30.470 51.0 50.9 17.8 0.976 376 0.617

C2-CTC-B1 15 32.470 50.9 51.0 17.7 0.847 327 0.660

C2-CTC-B1 16 31.838 51.0 50.9 17.8 0.898 346 0.644

C2-CTC-B1 17 33.811 51.0 50.9 17.8 1.131 436 0.684

C2-CTC-B1 18 30.746 50.9 51.0 17.9 0.634 244 0.618

C2-L-B1 1 30.257 49.9 49.9 18.1 0.471 189 0.633

C2-L-B1 2 29.831 49.9 50.0 18.1 0.676 271 0.624

C2-L-B1 3 30.164 49.9 50.0 18.1 0.760 304 0.628

C2-L-B1 4 33.273 50.1 49.9 18.1 1.005 403 0.695

C2-L-B1 5 30.649 50.0 49.9 17.9 0.732 294 0.648

C2-L-B1 6 30.772 50.1 50.0 17.9 0.969 387 0.647

C2-L-B1 7 30.366 50.5 49.9 18.2 0.710 281 0.624

C2-L-B1 8 30.642 50.0 49.9 18.1 0.836 335 0.640

C2-L-B1 9 31.124 49.9 49.9 18.1 0.818 329 0.651

C2-L-B1 10 29.127 50.0 49.8 17.9 0.919 369 0.615

C2-L-B1 11 26.802 50.0 49.9 17.0 0.624 250 0.597

C2-L-B1 12 29.688 49.9 49.9 17.6 0.921 370 0.639

C2-L-B1 13 31.167 50.7 49.9 17.9 0.823 325 0.649

C2-L-B1 14 27.815 50.1 49.8 18.0 0.538 216 0.584

C2-L-B1 15 31.777 49.9 49.9 18.4 0.710 285 0.653

C2-L-B1 16 32.460 49.9 49.9 18.4 0.953 383 0.669

C2-L-B1 17 31.023 49.9 50.0 18.3 0.814 326 0.639

C2-L-B1 18 33.410 49.9 49.9 18.4 0.894 359 0.688

C2-L-B1 19 35.420 50.7 49.8 18.7 0.945 374 0.706

C2-L-B1 20 27.361 49.9 50.0 18.8 0.098 39 0.550

C2-L-B1 21 28.568 49.9 49.8 18.5 0.441 177 0.587

C2-L-B1 22 26.952 49.8 49.8 17.7 0.329 133 0.580

C2-L-B1 23 30.307 50.1 49.7 17.9 0.415 167 0.640

C2-L-B1 24 32.807 49.9 50.0 18.5 0.748 300 0.668

Page 241: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

241

Experiment 2 Data

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm 3)

C2-L-B1 25 35.485 51.0 49.9 18.8 0.437 172 0.697

C2-L-B2 1 27.013 50.0 49.9 18.0 0.376 151 0.565

C2-L-B2 2 29.922 49.9 49.8 18.2 0.768 309 0.622

C2-L-B2 3 30.719 49.9 49.9 18.0 0.811 326 0.646

C2-L-B2 4 31.384 49.9 49.9 18.0 0.938 377 0.660

C2-L-B2 5 31.722 49.9 49.9 18.2 0.858 345 0.658

C2-L-B2 6 30.219 49.9 50.0 18.1 0.894 358 0.629

C2-L-B2 7 30.962 50.6 50.1 18.5 0.673 266 0.623

C2-L-B2 8 29.716 49.8 50.0 18.3 0.726 291 0.614

C2-L-B2 9 30.521 50.0 50.0 18.2 0.912 365 0.632

C2-L-B2 10 32.594 49.9 50.0 18.3 0.938 376 0.674

C2-L-B2 11 32.914 49.9 49.9 18.2 0.961 386 0.684

C2-L-B2 12 31.784 49.9 50.1 18.2 0.981 393 0.657

C2-L-B2 13 32.826 51.1 49.9 18.4 0.673 264 0.658

C2-L-B2 14 29.052 49.9 49.9 18.3 0.709 284 0.599

C2-L-B2 15 31.301 49.9 49.8 18.2 0.689 277 0.651

C2-L-B2 16 32.265 50.0 50.0 18.4 0.703 281 0.660

C2-L-B2 17 31.771 50.1 50.1 18.2 0.874 349 0.655

C2-L-B2 18 31.937 49.8 50.0 18.3 0.815 327 0.661

C2-L-B2 19 31.236 50.7 50.0 18.3 0.949 374 0.632

C2-L-B2 20 29.748 49.8 49.9 18.6 0.257 103 0.604

C2-L-B2 21 28.598 49.9 50.0 18.4 0.393 158 0.586

C2-L-B2 22 31.890 50.0 50.0 18.6 0.810 324 0.646

C2-L-B2 23 32.018 49.7 50.0 18.5 0.860 346 0.654

C2-L-B2 24 29.398 50.0 50.0 18.4 0.739 296 0.603

C2-L-B2 25 33.504 51.4 50.0 18.8 0.783 305 0.654

C2-L-B3 1 29.936 49.9 49.9 18.3 0.607 244 0.619

C2-L-B3 2 28.794 49.9 49.8 18.4 0.562 226 0.594

C2-L-B3 3 30.448 49.8 49.9 18.3 0.692 278 0.631

C2-L-B3 4 32.875 49.9 49.9 18.5 0.809 325 0.671

C2-L-B3 5 30.627 49.8 49.9 18.5 0.735 296 0.627

C2-L-B3 6 29.376 49.9 50.0 18.4 0.573 230 0.603

Page 242: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

242

Appendix D

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm 3)

C2-L-B3 7 34.042 51.0 50.0 18.6 0.822 322 0.676

C2-L-B3 8 30.213 49.9 50.0 18.5 0.692 277 0.617

C2-L-B3 9 31.055 50.2 50.0 18.4 0.733 292 0.633

C2-L-B3 10 31.597 49.9 49.9 18.5 0.828 333 0.647

C2-L-B3 11 32.578 49.9 49.9 18.5 0.830 334 0.666

C2-L-B3 12 31.100 50.0 49.9 18.4 0.727 291 0.639

C2-L-B3 13 31.332 50.9 50.0 18.6 0.753 296 0.625

C2-L-B3 14 28.240 49.8 50.0 18.7 0.283 114 0.572

C2-L-B3 15 31.030 49.9 50.0 18.6 0.637 255 0.628

C2-L-B3 16 31.862 49.9 50.1 18.6 0.652 261 0.647

C2-L-B3 17 32.521 49.9 50.0 18.7 0.630 253 0.658

C2-L-B3 18 32.012 49.9 50.0 18.5 0.673 270 0.655

C2-L-B3 19 32.194 51.1 49.9 18.7 0.692 271 0.635

C2-L-B3 20 27.027 50.0 49.9 18.9 0.101 41 0.540

C2-L-B3 21 30.913 49.9 49.8 18.8 0.358 144 0.623

C2-L-B3 22 30.799 49.9 49.9 18.7 0.559 225 0.624

C2-L-B3 23 30.682 50.0 49.9 18.6 0.535 214 0.621

C2-L-B3 24 31.760 49.9 50.3 18.5 0.632 252 0.644

C2-L-B3 25 32.589 51.3 50.0 18.7 0.768 299 0.638

C2-L-B4 1 31.205 49.9 50.0 17.6 0.640 257 0.668

C2-L-B4 2 28.654 49.9 49.9 17.2 0.206 83 0.629

C2-L-B4 3 29.737 50.1 49.9 17.5 1.079 432 0.638

C2-L-B4 4 28.681 50.0 50.1 17.4 0.746 297 0.616

C2-L-B4 5 27.062 50.1 50.1 16.9 0.556 222 0.599

C2-L-B4 6 27.068 50.1 50.1 16.8 0.748 298 0.604

C2-L-B4 7 29.148 50.6 50.2 17.8 0.614 242 0.606

C2-L-B4 8 28.923 50.2 50.0 17.6 0.942 375 0.617

C2-L-B4 9 28.647 50.0 50.1 17.3 0.937 374 0.621

C2-L-B4 10 27.232 50.0 50.1 16.9 0.658 263 0.606

C2-L-B4 11 27.222 50.0 50.0 17.2 0.424 169 0.595

C2-L-B4 12 30.282 50.1 50.0 17.3 0.733 293 0.656

C2-L-B4 13 28.835 50.5 50.0 18.1 0.456 181 0.592

Page 243: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

243

Experiment 2 Data

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm 3)

C2-L-B4 14 29.175 49.9 49.8 17.3 0.853 343 0.637

C2-L-B4 15 30.242 50.0 49.9 17.8 0.877 351 0.639

C2-L-B4 16 31.230 50.0 50.2 17.9 1.005 400 0.652

C2-L-B4 17 29.397 49.9 50.1 17.9 0.499 199 0.619

C2-L-B4 18 28.743 50.0 50.0 17.7 0.813 325 0.611

C2-L-B4 19 28.274 50.5 50.0 17.5 0.427 169 0.601

C2-L-B4 20 27.452 49.9 50.0 17.5 0.194 78 0.592

C2-L-B4 21 29.961 50.0 49.8 18.1 0.557 224 0.624

C2-L-B4 22 29.401 50.0 49.9 17.8 0.781 313 0.623

C2-L-B4 23 27.490 50.1 49.8 17.7 0.432 173 0.585

C2-L-B4 24 29.722 50.0 49.9 17.6 0.579 232 0.637

C2-L-B4 25 28.910 50.9 50.0 17.4 0.238 93 0.613

C2-L-B5 1 29.353 49.9 49.9 16.9 0.890 358 0.656

C2-L-B5 2 29.802 50.0 49.8 17.2 0.739 297 0.655

C2-L-B5 3 29.326 49.9 49.8 17.3 0.573 231 0.643

C2-L-B5 4 28.557 49.9 50.0 17.1 0.874 350 0.630

C2-L-B5 5 28.772 49.8 50.0 17.1 0.899 361 0.634

C2-L-B5 6 26.682 49.9 50.0 16.8 0.819 328 0.598

C2-L-B5 7 27.754 50.4 49.9 16.8 0.642 255 0.618

C2-L-B5 8 27.552 50.1 49.9 16.8 0.639 256 0.617

C2-L-B5 9 29.524 50.0 49.9 17.1 0.765 307 0.653

C2-L-B5 10 28.140 49.9 50.0 17.4 0.728 292 0.611

C2-L-B5 11 28.529 50.0 50.0 17.3 0.799 320 0.620

C2-L-B5 12 28.872 50.0 50.0 17.1 0.965 386 0.634

C2-L-B5 13 29.656 50.3 50.2 17.1 0.675 268 0.648

C2-L-B5 14 28.217 49.9 50.1 17.2 0.821 328 0.618

C2-L-B5 15 30.235 50.0 49.9 17.4 0.994 398 0.656

C2-L-B5 16 28.168 50.0 50.1 17.2 0.870 347 0.614

C2-L-B5 17 27.633 50.0 49.9 16.8 0.525 210 0.621

C2-L-B5 18 30.346 50.0 49.9 17.4 0.794 318 0.657

C2-L-B5 19 29.361 50.3 50.0 17.7 0.550 219 0.622

C2-L-B5 20 26.686 50.0 49.9 17.3 0.300 120 0.581

Page 244: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

244

Appendix D

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm 3)

C2-L-B5 21 29.980 49.9 50.1 18.1 0.591 237 0.625

C2-L-B5 22 30.590 50.0 50.0 18.1 0.321 128 0.635

C2-L-B5 23 30.970 49.9 50.0 18.4 0.797 319 0.636

C2-L-B5 24 29.883 50.0 50.0 18.3 0.337 135 0.614

C2-L-B5 25 29.356 50.7 49.9 17.8 0.312 123 0.613

C2-L-B6 1 27.350 49.9 49.8 17.6 0.387 156 0.590

C2-L-B6 2 26.958 50.0 49.9 17.5 0.464 186 0.580

C2-L-B6 3 27.967 50.0 49.9 17.7 0.445 178 0.598

C2-L-B6 4 29.564 49.8 49.9 17.4 0.862 347 0.645

C2-L-B6 5 28.680 50.0 49.9 16.7 0.724 291 0.649

C2-L-B6 6 26.772 50.0 49.7 16.9 0.758 305 0.601

C2-L-B6 7 28.861 50.3 49.9 17.0 0.859 342 0.636

C2-L-B6 8 27.585 49.9 49.9 17.2 0.495 199 0.605

C2-L-B6 9 27.129 49.9 49.9 16.7 0.670 269 0.615

C2-L-B6 10 29.817 50.0 49.9 16.9 0.876 352 0.668

C2-L-B6 11 27.422 49.9 49.8 16.8 0.747 301 0.617

C2-L-B6 12 29.557 49.8 49.8 16.6 0.720 290 0.674

C2-L-B6 13 28.686 50.5 50.2 16.6 0.586 232 0.642

C2-L-B6 14 27.415 50.0 49.8 17.7 0.265 106 0.587

C2-L-B6 15 28.279 50.1 50.0 17.4 0.546 218 0.611

C2-L-B6 16 27.993 49.9 50.0 17.2 0.901 361 0.614

C2-L-B6 17 26.935 49.9 49.9 16.6 0.518 208 0.612

C2-L-B6 18 27.577 50.1 50.1 16.9 0.624 249 0.613

C2-L-B6 19 27.840 50.5 50.0 17.4 0.580 230 0.598

C2-L-B6 20 29.652 50.0 50.0 17.9 0.143 57 0.623

C2-L-B6 21 29.633 50.0 49.9 17.4 0.608 244 0.640

C2-L-B6 22 27.901 49.9 49.9 16.9 0.509 204 0.624

C2-L-B6 23 27.649 49.9 49.9 16.7 0.499 200 0.626

C2-L-B6 24 27.232 50.0 49.9 16.7 0.645 258 0.616

C2-L-B6 25 28.990 50.7 50.0 16.9 0.322 127 0.637

C2-L-B7 1 30.425 51.0 51.1 17.7 0.575 221 0.622

C2-L-B7 2 32.143 51.2 51.1 17.8 0.804 308 0.652

Page 245: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

245

Experiment 2 Data

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm 3)

C2-L-B7 3 31.641 51.0 51.0 17.8 0.649 249 0.644

C2-L-B7 4 32.097 51.1 51.1 17.8 0.824 315 0.649

C2-L-B7 5 31.602 51.1 51.1 17.8 0.617 237 0.641

C2-L-B7 6 30.832 51.2 51.1 17.9 0.856 328 0.622

C2-L-B7 7 30.622 51.2 51.1 17.8 0.486 186 0.620

C2-L-B7 8 31.397 51.1 50.9 17.8 0.776 298 0.640

C2-L-B7 9 31.308 51.1 51.0 18.0 0.829 318 0.629

C2-L-B7 10 32.189 51.1 51.2 17.8 0.843 322 0.651

C2-L-B7 11 31.467 51.1 51.1 17.8 0.739 283 0.637

C2-L-B7 12 32.727 51.0 51.2 17.8 0.864 331 0.664

C2-L-B7 13 32.346 51.1 51.1 17.9 0.672 257 0.653

C2-L-B7 14 33.585 51.1 51.0 18.0 0.820 315 0.675

C2-L-B7 15 30.979 51.0 51.1 18.0 0.914 350 0.623

C2-L-B7 16 33.168 51.0 51.1 18.0 0.814 312 0.667

C2-L-B7 17 35.009 51.1 51.1 18.1 0.814 312 0.697

C2-L-B7 18 33.087 51.1 51.0 18.0 0.928 356 0.667

C2-L-B7 19 32.964 51.2 51.0 17.9 0.690 265 0.664

C2-L-B7 20 31.233 51.3 51.1 17.9 0.718 274 0.627

C2-L-B7 21 35.207 51.0 51.0 18.1 0.873 336 0.704

C2-L-B7 22 33.031 51.1 50.9 18.1 1.032 397 0.660

C2-L-B7 23 33.521 51.0 51.0 18.1 0.733 282 0.673

C2-L-B7 24 34.180 51.1 51.0 18.1 0.681 261 0.684

C2-L-B7 25 31.693 51.1 51.1 18.0 0.829 317 0.635

C2-L-B8 1 31.776 51.1 51.2 17.7 0.488 187 0.647

C2-L-B8 2 33.709 51.1 51.0 17.8 0.622 239 0.686

C2-L-B8 3 35.323 51.1 50.9 17.7 0.994 382 0.720

C2-L-B8 4 35.999 51.2 51.1 17.8 0.894 342 0.727

C2-L-B8 5 34.532 51.2 51.1 17.7 1.022 391 0.701

C2-L-B8 6 32.986 51.2 51.2 17.7 0.916 350 0.669

C2-L-B8 7 34.168 51.0 51.1 17.9 1.067 409 0.690

C2-L-B8 8 30.371 51.0 51.1 17.8 0.532 204 0.617

C2-L-B8 9 33.307 51.0 51.1 17.7 0.943 362 0.679

Page 246: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

246

Appendix D

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm 3)

C2-L-B8 10 32.088 51.0 51.2 17.8 0.796 305 0.650

C2-L-B8 11 34.107 51.0 50.9 17.8 1.143 440 0.693

C2-L-B8 12 33.600 51.0 51.0 17.8 0.933 359 0.681

C2-L-B8 13 35.077 51.1 51.2 17.9 0.838 321 0.707

C2-L-B8 14 30.096 51.1 50.9 17.9 0.515 198 0.609

C2-L-B8 15 33.627 51.1 51.0 17.8 0.904 347 0.682

C2-L-B8 16 34.760 51.0 50.9 18.0 0.951 367 0.701

C2-L-B8 17 33.685 51.1 51.0 18.0 0.962 369 0.677

C2-L-B8 18 33.871 51.1 51.0 17.9 0.890 342 0.682

C2-L-B8 19 32.915 51.1 50.8 18.0 0.971 374 0.665

C2-L-B8 20 29.523 51.1 51.0 18.1 0.189 73 0.590

C2-L-B8 21 32.542 51.0 51.0 18.0 0.604 232 0.654

C2-L-B8 22 33.475 51.1 51.0 18.0 0.630 242 0.671

C2-L-B8 23 31.207 51.0 50.9 18.1 0.444 171 0.625

C2-L-B8 24 33.306 51.1 51.1 18.0 0.721 276 0.667

C2-L-B8 25 33.311 51.1 51.1 18.1 0.768 294 0.663

C2-L-B9 1 30.753 51.0 51.1 17.8 0.444 170 0.623

C2-L-B9 2 31.985 51.0 51.0 17.9 0.555 214 0.647

C2-L-B9 3 33.122 51.2 51.0 17.8 1.058 406 0.673

C2-L-B9 4 33.425 51.0 51.0 17.9 0.871 335 0.675

C2-L-B9 5 33.940 51.0 51.1 17.9 1.055 405 0.686

C2-L-B9 6 33.873 51.1 50.9 17.9 1.015 390 0.686

C2-L-B9 7 31.690 51.1 51.1 18.0 0.686 263 0.636

C2-L-B9 8 32.288 51.1 50.9 17.9 0.658 253 0.655

C2-L-B9 9 34.204 51.2 51.1 17.8 0.959 366 0.690

C2-L-B9 10 33.323 51.2 51.1 18.0 1.001 383 0.667

C2-L-B9 11 34.789 51.1 51.0 17.8 1.010 388 0.705

C2-L-B9 12 35.534 51.3 51.1 17.9 0.781 298 0.715

C2-L-B9 13 31.507 51.1 51.1 18.0 0.547 210 0.632

C2-L-B9 14 30.968 51.2 51.0 18.0 0.364 140 0.621

C2-L-B9 15 32.948 51.2 51.0 17.9 0.716 274 0.664

C2-L-B9 16 32.792 51.1 51.1 18.0 0.821 315 0.659

Page 247: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

247

Experiment 2 Data

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm3)

C2-L-B9 17 35.286 51.0 51.2 17.9 1.042 399 0.711

C2-L-B9 18 33.531 51.1 51.3 17.9 0.789 301 0.675

C2-L-B9 19 34.465 51.2 51.2 18.1 0.780 298 0.685

C2-L-B9 20 30.081 51.0 51.1 18.3 0.121 46 0.594

C2-L-B9 21 32.616 51.2 51.1 18.1 0.534 204 0.648

C2-L-B9 22 33.582 51.0 51.1 18.0 0.712 273 0.673

C2-L-B9 23 33.901 51.0 51.0 18.2 0.697 268 0.676

C2-L-B9 24 35.697 51.1 51.1 18.1 0.655 251 0.711

C2-L-B9 25 34.195 51.1 51.1 18.4 0.301 115 0.670

C2-L-B10 3 34.729 51.0 50.9 18.5 1.055 406 0.673

C2-L-B10 4 34.213 51.1 50.9 18.5 1.095 421 0.663

C2-L-B10 5 34.431 51.1 50.9 18.6 1.189 458 0.663

C2-L-B10 6 34.576 51.1 50.9 18.6 1.174 452 0.667

C2-L-B10 9 36.467 51.0 51.0 18.6 1.393 536 0.700

C2-L-B10 10 35.299 51.0 51.0 18.6 1.143 440 0.678

C2-L-B10 11 34.540 51.0 51.0 18.6 1.268 487 0.666

C2-L-B10 12 35.126 51.0 51.0 18.5 1.111 427 0.678

C2-L-B10 15 35.617 51.0 51.0 18.6 1.016 390 0.683

C2-L-B10 16 35.434 51.0 51.0 18.8 0.946 364 0.675

C2-L-B10 17 33.695 50.9 51.0 18.7 1.118 431 0.647

C2-L-B10 18 34.188 51.0 51.1 18.7 1.094 421 0.654

C2-L-B11 3 35.018 50.9 50.9 18.4 1.139 440 0.687

C2-L-B11 4 33.017 50.9 51.0 18.3 0.990 382 0.647

C2-L-B11 5 33.964 51.0 50.9 18.4 1.098 423 0.664

C2-L-B11 6 34.948 50.9 50.8 18.4 1.014 392 0.686

C2-L-B11 9 33.732 50.9 50.9 18.3 1.152 444 0.664

C2-L-B11 10 31.469 50.9 51.0 18.3 0.745 287 0.618

C2-L-B11 11 32.795 50.9 50.9 18.4 0.948 366 0.643

C2-L-B11 12 34.398 50.9 50.9 18.3 1.110 428 0.675

C2-L-B11 15 31.644 50.9 50.8 18.4 0.921 356 0.621

C2-L-B11 16 31.183 50.9 50.9 18.5 0.805 311 0.608

C2-L-B11 17 31.645 50.9 51.0 18.5 0.897 346 0.617

Page 248: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

248

Appendix D

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm 3)

C2-L-B11 18 35.709 51.0 51.0 18.5 1.148 442 0.695

C2-L-B12 3 33.374 50.9 50.8 18.5 0.955 369 0.651

C2-L-B12 4 34.184 50.9 50.8 18.5 1.204 465 0.664

C2-L-B12 5 33.149 50.9 50.9 18.6 1.072 414 0.642

C2-L-B12 6 32.476 50.9 50.9 18.3 1.037 400 0.637

C2-L-B12 9 32.002 50.9 50.9 18.4 1.114 430 0.628

C2-L-B12 10 33.217 50.9 50.9 18.5 1.127 435 0.647

C2-L-B12 11 35.432 50.9 50.8 18.6 1.072 415 0.685

C2-L-B12 12 31.024 50.9 50.9 18.5 0.953 368 0.602

C2-L-B12 15 34.504 50.8 50.9 18.6 0.849 328 0.670

C2-L-B12 16 33.188 50.9 50.8 18.6 0.985 381 0.644

C2-L-B12 17 33.000 50.9 50.9 18.6 0.941 364 0.639

C2-L-B12 18 31.051 50.9 50.8 18.6 0.831 321 0.602

C2-L-B13 3 31.075 51.0 50.9 17.7 0.815 314 0.632

C2-L-B13 4 30.401 50.9 50.9 17.4 0.648 250 0.630

C2-L-B13 5 31.688 50.9 50.9 17.1 1.111 429 0.668

C2-L-B13 6 31.973 50.9 50.9 17.3 1.152 445 0.666

C2-L-B13 9 30.637 50.9 50.9 17.3 1.015 392 0.640

C2-L-B13 10 31.518 51.0 50.9 17.3 1.170 452 0.658

C2-L-B13 11 32.480 50.9 51.0 17.5 1.007 388 0.668

C2-L-B13 12 31.228 50.9 50.9 17.6 1.095 423 0.639

C2-L-B13 15 31.209 51.0 50.9 17.6 1.137 438 0.639

C2-L-B13 16 32.668 51.0 51.0 17.6 1.124 433 0.666

C2-L-B13 17 31.466 51.0 50.9 17.9 0.722 278 0.634

C2-L-B13 18 31.480 51.0 50.9 17.7 0.704 271 0.641

C2-L-B14 3 30.481 50.9 50.9 17.2 1.129 436 0.638

C2-L-B14 4 29.797 50.9 50.9 16.8 0.968 373 0.640

C2-L-B14 5 32.740 51.0 50.9 17.7 1.169 451 0.667

C2-L-B14 6 30.660 50.9 50.9 17.3 1.234 476 0.638

C2-L-B14 9 30.997 50.9 51.0 17.2 1.322 510 0.649

C2-L-B14 10 29.634 50.9 51.0 17.1 1.101 424 0.625

C2-L-B14 11 30.042 50.9 50.9 16.6 1.079 417 0.652

Page 249: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

249

Experiment 2 Data

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm 3)

C2-L-B14 12 30.077 50.9 50.9 17.2 1.066 412 0.628

C2-L-B14 15 31.834 50.9 50.9 17.6 0.860 332 0.654

C2-L-B14 16 31.710 50.9 50.9 17.6 1.027 397 0.650

C2-L-B14 17 32.156 50.9 50.9 17.8 1.144 442 0.651

C2-L-B14 18 31.920 50.9 50.8 17.9 0.700 271 0.644

C2-L-B15 3 30.611 51.0 50.9 17.6 1.004 386 0.625

C2-L-B15 4 30.020 51.0 50.9 17.7 0.707 273 0.611

C2-L-B15 5 32.173 51.0 50.9 17.9 0.866 334 0.646

C2-L-B15 6 34.090 51.0 51.0 18.0 1.074 413 0.680

C2-L-B15 9 33.104 51.0 50.9 17.9 1.381 533 0.666

C2-L-B15 10 31.540 50.9 51.1 17.8 0.847 326 0.637

C2-L-B15 11 32.592 51.0 51.0 17.6 0.894 344 0.667

C2-L-B15 12 31.781 51.0 51.0 17.7 0.737 284 0.645

C2-L-B15 15 32.314 51.0 51.0 17.5 1.014 390 0.665

C2-L-B15 16 32.371 50.9 51.0 17.7 1.345 518 0.658

C2-L-B15 17 31.894 50.9 50.9 17.8 0.788 305 0.647

C2-L-B15 18 30.189 51.0 50.9 17.9 0.646 249 0.607

C2-S-B1 1 30.403 50.1 50.2 18.0 0.749 298 0.635

C2-S-B1 2 29.902 50.4 50.1 18.0 0.606 240 0.619

C2-S-B1 3 32.417 50.1 50.5 18.0 0.807 319 0.671

C2-S-B1 4 33.728 50.2 50.1 18.1 0.869 345 0.698

C2-S-B1 5 35.878 50.1 50.1 18.1 1.089 434 0.745

C2-S-B1 6 30.643 50.1 50.1 18.0 0.562 224 0.640

C2-S-B1 7 26.020 49.5 50.1 18.1 0.224 90 0.546

C2-S-B1 8 30.949 50.1 50.1 18.0 0.596 238 0.645

C2-S-B1 9 32.897 50.1 50.2 18.1 0.684 272 0.682

C2-S-B1 10 31.793 50.2 50.2 18.1 0.806 320 0.657

C2-S-B1 11 32.575 50.1 50.1 18.0 0.925 368 0.677

C2-S-B1 12 32.840 50.1 49.9 18.0 0.924 369 0.686

C2-S-B1 13 29.534 49.5 50.3 18.2 0.347 139 0.613

C2-S-B1 14 30.093 50.1 50.2 18.1 0.630 251 0.621

C2-S-B1 15 31.434 50.1 50.1 18.1 0.741 295 0.650

Page 250: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

250

Appendix D

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm 3)

C2-S-B1 16 33.152 50.1 50.3 18.0 0.951 377 0.690

C2-S-B1 17 33.194 50.1 50.1 18.0 0.862 343 0.694

C2-S-B1 18 32.016 50.1 50.3 18.3 0.583 231 0.656

C2-S-B1 19 28.492 49.6 50.1 18.0 0.280 113 0.600

C2-S-B1 20 28.888 50.2 50.2 18.1 0.448 178 0.596

C2-S-B1 21 29.222 50.2 50.0 18.1 0.541 215 0.607

C2-S-B1 22 30.774 50.1 50.2 18.3 0.335 133 0.631

C2-S-B1 23 30.329 50.1 50.1 18.4 0.341 136 0.617

C2-S-B1 24 30.132 50.2 50.2 18.5 0.241 96 0.610

C2-S-B1 25 28.980 49.9 50.1 18.7 0.044 18 0.583

C2-S-B2 1 31.897 50.0 49.9 18.1 0.395 158 0.666

C2-S-B2 2 30.756 50.1 50.1 18.4 0.258 103 0.627

C2-S-B2 3 32.754 50.2 50.2 18.2 0.773 307 0.676

C2-S-B2 4 32.840 50.1 50.2 18.2 0.763 304 0.676

C2-S-B2 5 33.794 50.1 50.2 18.2 0.823 327 0.697

C2-S-B2 6 31.188 50.3 50.2 18.2 0.651 258 0.639

C2-S-B2 7 28.123 49.5 50.2 18.3 0.305 123 0.584

C2-S-B2 8 31.105 50.1 50.2 18.3 0.222 88 0.638

C2-S-B2 9 33.317 50.2 50.2 18.3 0.646 256 0.683

C2-S-B2 10 32.982 50.1 50.1 18.2 0.708 282 0.680

C2-S-B2 11 31.120 50.1 50.0 18.2 0.658 262 0.642

C2-S-B2 12 30.762 50.1 50.1 18.3 0.742 296 0.631

C2-S-B2 13 31.102 49.5 50.2 18.5 0.470 189 0.637

C2-S-B2 14 27.188 50.1 50.1 18.2 0.082 33 0.563

C2-S-B2 15 31.080 50.1 50.1 18.2 0.428 171 0.641

C2-S-B2 16 32.870 50.1 50.1 18.5 0.694 277 0.667

C2-S-B2 17 31.000 50.0 50.0 18.4 0.516 207 0.635

C2-S-B2 18 29.339 50.4 50.2 18.3 0.284 112 0.597

C2-S-B2 19 29.685 49.7 50.0 18.3 0.328 132 0.616

C2-S-B2 21 30.518 50.0 50.0 18.6 0.188 75 0.618

C2-S-B2 22 29.090 50.1 50.0 18.2 0.241 96 0.602

C2-S-B2 23 31.695 50.3 50.1 18.7 0.358 142 0.634

Page 251: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

251

Experiment 2 Data

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm 3)

C2-S-B2 24 29.344 50.2 50.0 18.6 0.116 46 0.593

C2-S-B2 25 29.124 49.8 50.0 18.9 0.079 32 0.584

C2-S-B3 1 29.357 49.5 50.1 18.2 0.252 101 0.613

C2-S-B3 2 29.553 50.3 50.0 18.3 0.425 169 0.605

C2-S-B3 3 29.168 50.2 50.0 18.1 0.513 204 0.605

C2-S-B3 4 29.457 50.1 50.0 18.2 0.653 261 0.609

C2-S-B3 5 31.890 50.2 50.1 18.1 0.545 217 0.661

C2-S-B3 6 31.458 50.1 50.1 18.1 0.667 266 0.652

C2-S-B3 7 29.406 49.0 50.2 18.2 0.347 141 0.620

C2-S-B3 8 31.218 50.0 50.0 18.0 0.592 236 0.651

C2-S-B3 9 31.894 50.2 50.0 18.0 0.574 228 0.665

C2-S-B3 10 33.244 50.1 50.1 18.2 0.583 232 0.685

C2-S-B3 11 33.315 50.2 50.2 18.2 0.474 188 0.684

C2-S-B3 12 33.515 50.2 50.1 18.1 0.979 389 0.694

C2-S-B3 13 31.263 49.3 50.1 18.1 0.398 161 0.659

C2-S-B3 14 30.014 50.1 50.1 18.2 0.237 95 0.618

C2-S-B3 15 31.618 50.1 50.2 18.2 0.620 246 0.652

C2-S-B3 16 32.753 50.1 50.2 18.3 0.521 207 0.671

C2-S-B3 17 34.206 50.2 50.3 18.2 0.502 199 0.702

C2-S-B3 18 33.075 49.9 50.2 18.3 0.850 339 0.680

C2-S-B3 19 34.163 49.8 50.2 18.2 0.459 184 0.706

C2-S-B3 20 30.746 50.3 50.0 18.5 0.227 90 0.622

C2-S-B3 21 29.969 50.1 50.0 18.3 0.382 153 0.616

C2-S-B3 22 32.519 50.3 50.2 18.4 0.704 279 0.660

C2-S-B3 23 31.814 50.0 50.0 18.3 0.603 241 0.656

C2-S-B3 24 30.254 50.0 50.1 18.1 0.718 286 0.627

C2-S-B3 25 31.695 49.9 50.1 18.7 0.188 75 0.637

C2-S-B4 1 30.475 49.9 49.8 18.2 0.735 296 0.635

C2-S-B4 2 30.250 50.0 49.7 18.3 0.579 233 0.628

C2-S-B4 3 29.418 49.9 49.9 18.2 0.631 253 0.610

C2-S-B4 4 29.911 49.9 49.9 18.2 0.675 271 0.620

Page 252: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

252

Appendix D

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm 3)

C2-S-B4 5 30.815 50.0 49.8 18.3 0.612 246 0.638

C2-S-B4 6 29.530 50.0 49.9 18.1 0.620 249 0.615

C2-S-B4 7 29.250 50.5 50.0 18.2 0.411 163 0.601

C2-S-B4 8 32.538 50.0 49.9 18.2 0.647 260 0.674

C2-S-B4 9 29.517 50.0 50.0 17.9 0.662 265 0.622

C2-S-B4 10 30.631 49.9 49.9 18.4 0.542 218 0.631

C2-S-B4 11 32.323 50.0 49.9 18.3 0.841 337 0.667

C2-S-B4 12 31.202 50.0 50.0 18.3 0.741 296 0.642

C2-S-B4 13 31.708 50.6 50.0 18.4 0.417 165 0.641

C2-S-B4 14 32.829 50.0 49.9 18.1 0.663 265 0.683

C2-S-B4 15 31.753 50.0 50.0 18.1 0.773 309 0.662

C2-S-B4 16 32.362 50.0 49.9 18.3 0.820 329 0.667

C2-S-B4 17 31.528 50.0 50.0 18.0 0.735 294 0.659

C2-S-B4 18 30.243 50.1 50.0 18.3 0.668 267 0.620

C2-S-B4 19 32.447 50.5 49.9 18.5 0.556 221 0.654

C2-S-B4 20 30.870 50.1 49.9 18.6 0.381 153 0.625

C2-S-B4 21 31.424 49.9 49.9 18.4 0.528 212 0.645

C2-S-B4 22 32.782 49.9 49.9 18.5 0.726 292 0.670

C2-S-B4 23 32.848 49.9 49.9 18.5 0.742 298 0.672

C2-S-B4 24 29.026 50.0 49.8 18.5 0.344 138 0.595

C2-S-B4 25 31.501 50.5 50.0 18.6 0.276 109 0.630

C2-S-B5 1 30.874 50.1 50.2 18.2 0.740 294 0.634

C2-S-B5 2 30.700 50.0 50.0 17.8 0.573 229 0.652

C2-S-B5 3 30.815 50.0 49.9 17.8 0.510 205 0.654

C2-S-B5 4 30.902 50.0 50.1 18.2 0.623 249 0.639

C2-S-B5 5 32.734 50.1 50.0 18.1 0.735 294 0.682

C2-S-B5 6 29.488 50.0 50.0 17.9 0.672 269 0.620

C2-S-B5 7 30.217 50.4 49.9 18.0 0.498 198 0.628

C2-S-B5 8 30.162 50.0 50.0 17.8 0.663 266 0.641

C2-S-B5 9 30.554 50.1 50.0 17.7 0.834 333 0.650

C2-S-B5 10 30.880 48.9 50.0 18.0 0.844 345 0.661

C2-S-B5 11 29.935 50.0 50.2 17.9 0.515 205 0.626

Page 253: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

253

Experiment 2 Data

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm 3)

C2-S-B5 12 30.231 50.0 50.1 18.0 0.695 277 0.630

C2-S-B5 13 29.640 50.3 50.0 18.0 0.507 201 0.615

C2-S-B5 14 27.107 50.0 49.9 17.7 0.609 244 0.577

C2-S-B5 15 29.936 50.0 49.9 18.1 0.664 266 0.624

C2-S-B5 16 32.224 50.0 49.9 18.2 0.900 361 0.670

C2-S-B5 17 33.645 50.1 49.9 18.1 0.860 345 0.703

C2-S-B5 18 31.804 49.9 50.0 18.1 0.520 208 0.664

C2-S-B5 19 30.453 50.5 49.9 18.4 0.376 150 0.619

C2-S-B5 20 29.780 50.1 49.9 18.3 0.367 147 0.612

C2-S-B5 21 27.922 50.0 49.8 17.8 0.617 248 0.593

C2-S-B5 22 31.346 50.1 49.9 18.1 0.478 191 0.653

C2-S-B5 23 30.410 50.1 49.8 17.8 0.553 222 0.647

C2-S-B5 24 30.285 50.5 49.9 17.4 0.447 177 0.648

C2-S-B5 25 31.247 49.9 50.0 18.1 0.457 183 0.650

C2-S-B6 1 31.705 49.9 50.0 18.2 0.518 208 0.656

C2-S-B6 2 31.298 50.0 50.1 18.3 0.487 194 0.643

C2-S-B6 3 29.738 49.9 49.9 18.1 0.607 243 0.622

C2-S-B6 4 30.853 50.0 50.1 18.1 0.383 153 0.642

C2-S-B6 5 31.052 50.0 49.9 18.3 0.847 339 0.641

C2-S-B6 6 30.338 50.0 49.9 18.2 0.710 284 0.627

C2-S-B6 7 29.294 50.3 50.0 18.2 0.512 204 0.603

C2-S-B6 8 31.373 50.0 49.9 18.3 0.520 208 0.648

C2-S-B6 9 29.966 50.0 49.8 18.1 0.678 272 0.626

C2-S-B6 10 29.201 50.0 49.9 18.1 0.666 267 0.608

C2-S-B6 11 30.682 50.0 49.9 18.2 0.782 313 0.634

C2-S-B6 12 32.368 50.0 49.9 18.4 0.727 291 0.664

C2-S-B6 13 31.288 50.5 50.0 18.5 0.678 269 0.632

C2-S-B6 14 30.235 50.0 50.1 18.3 0.323 129 0.622

C2-S-B6 15 31.166 50.0 50.1 18.3 0.462 184 0.639

C2-S-B6 16 30.878 49.9 50.2 18.4 0.544 217 0.630

C2-S-B6 17 30.622 50.0 50.1 18.4 0.509 203 0.625

C2-S-B6 18 32.881 50.0 50.2 18.3 0.762 303 0.673

Page 254: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

254

Appendix D

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm 3)

C2-S-B6 19 31.840 50.4 49.9 18.4 0.526 209 0.646

C2-S-B6 20 29.815 49.9 49.9 18.6 0.335 135 0.607

C2-S-B6 21 30.678 49.8 49.9 18.4 0.513 207 0.631

C2-S-B6 22 30.565 49.9 49.8 18.2 0.487 196 0.637

C2-S-B6 23 31.504 50.0 49.8 18.3 0.664 267 0.650

C2-S-B6 24 30.270 49.9 49.9 18.3 0.378 152 0.627

C2-S-B6 25 32.480 50.8 50.0 18.3 0.465 183 0.658

C2-S-B7 1 27.582 51.0 50.9 17.6 0.348 134 0.568

C2-S-B7 2 30.027 50.9 51.0 17.9 0.473 182 0.607

C2-S-B7 3 30.192 51.0 50.9 17.8 0.989 381 0.616

C2-S-B7 4 28.346 51.0 51.0 17.9 0.433 166 0.572

C2-S-B7 5 30.470 51.0 50.9 17.9 0.860 331 0.616

C2-S-B7 6 29.847 51.0 51.1 17.6 0.716 275 0.614

C2-S-B7 7 31.709 51.0 51.0 17.6 0.917 352 0.652

C2-S-B7 8 30.908 50.9 50.9 17.7 0.690 267 0.634

C2-S-B7 9 30.934 51.0 50.9 17.6 0.949 366 0.638

C2-S-B7 10 31.688 51.1 50.9 17.8 0.691 266 0.643

C2-S-B7 11 32.364 51.0 51.0 17.6 0.886 341 0.665

C2-S-B7 12 29.658 51.2 51.1 18.1 0.782 299 0.591

C2-S-B7 13 30.365 51.1 51.0 17.7 0.579 222 0.621

C2-S-B7 14 33.735 51.0 51.0 17.8 0.939 362 0.686

C2-S-B7 15 32.208 51.1 50.9 17.6 1.090 419 0.661

C2-S-B7 16 34.281 50.9 51.0 17.9 0.945 364 0.695

C2-S-B7 17 33.595 51.0 51.0 18.0 0.936 360 0.675

C2-S-B7 18 31.495 51.0 50.9 17.6 0.900 347 0.651

C2-S-B7 19 31.623 51.0 51.0 17.7 0.876 337 0.648

C2-S-B7 20 33.260 50.9 51.0 17.9 0.699 269 0.674

C2-S-B7 21 33.571 51.0 50.9 18.0 1.105 426 0.677

C2-S-B7 22 33.974 51.0 51.0 18.2 0.954 367 0.676

C2-S-B7 23 33.273 51.0 51.0 18.1 0.710 273 0.665

C2-S-B7 24 31.611 51.0 51.1 18.0 0.758 291 0.634

C2-S-B7 25 29.571 51.1 51.1 17.9 0.589 225 0.594

Page 255: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

255

Experiment 2 Data

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm 3)

C2-S-B8 1 32.236 51.0 51.0 17.9 0.879 338 0.653

C2-S-B8 2 31.813 51.1 51.0 18.0 1.003 385 0.640

C2-S-B8 3 31.497 51.1 51.1 17.7 0.490 188 0.642

C2-S-B8 4 31.635 51.1 50.9 17.7 0.713 274 0.646

C2-S-B8 5 31.099 51.0 51.0 17.5 0.586 225 0.643

C2-S-B8 6 30.565 51.1 51.0 17.6 0.846 325 0.629

C2-S-B8 7 31.371 51.1 51.1 17.7 0.760 291 0.640

C2-S-B8 8 30.404 51.1 51.0 17.7 0.994 381 0.622

C2-S-B8 9 32.062 51.0 51.0 17.8 0.978 376 0.652

C2-S-B8 10 31.961 51.1 51.1 17.9 0.551 211 0.643

C2-S-B8 11 32.000 51.1 51.0 17.9 0.950 364 0.647

C2-S-B8 12 32.195 51.1 51.1 17.8 0.853 327 0.654

C2-S-B8 13 31.824 51.0 51.0 18.0 0.726 279 0.639

C2-S-B8 14 30.178 51.1 51.0 17.9 0.613 235 0.608

C2-S-B8 15 31.429 50.9 51.1 18.0 0.669 257 0.631

C2-S-B8 16 33.658 51.1 51.1 17.9 0.759 291 0.680

C2-S-B8 17 31.987 50.9 51.1 17.9 0.974 374 0.649

C2-S-B8 18 31.121 51.0 51.1 17.8 0.608 233 0.632

C2-S-B8 19 31.857 51.0 51.0 18.1 0.599 230 0.637

C2-S-B8 20 32.581 51.2 51.0 18.3 0.557 214 0.645

C2-S-B8 21 31.584 50.9 50.9 18.0 0.200 77 0.639

C2-S-B8 22 32.195 51.0 51.0 18.0 0.745 286 0.646

C2-S-B8 23 33.935 50.9 50.9 17.9 0.740 285 0.687

C2-S-B8 24 31.622 51.0 51.0 17.8 0.656 252 0.644

C2-S-B8 25 31.456 50.6 51.1 18.3 0.435 168 0.627

C2-S-B9 1 28.781 51.0 50.9 17.8 0.480 185 0.586

C2-S-B9 2 29.662 51.0 51.0 17.6 0.807 311 0.610

C2-S-B9 3 30.664 51.0 50.9 17.1 0.970 373 0.650

C2-S-B9 4 33.193 51.0 50.9 17.3 0.922 355 0.695

C2-S-B9 5 31.823 51.0 51.1 17.7 0.744 286 0.650

C2-S-B9 6 30.926 51.0 51.0 17.8 0.769 296 0.628

C2-S-B9 7 29.128 51.0 51.1 17.5 0.318 122 0.602

Page 256: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

256

Appendix D

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm 3)

C2-S-B9 8 29.228 51.0 51.1 17.3 0.846 325 0.609

C2-S-B9 9 32.379 51.0 51.1 17.6 1.042 400 0.664

C2-S-B9 10 34.268 51.0 51.1 18.0 0.954 366 0.689

C2-S-B9 11 31.747 51.0 51.1 17.9 0.507 195 0.641

C2-S-B9 12 32.034 51.0 51.0 17.9 0.611 235 0.649

C2-S-B9 13 31.667 51.1 51.1 17.9 0.647 248 0.638

C2-S-B9 14 32.027 51.0 50.8 17.9 0.767 296 0.651

C2-S-B9 15 34.594 51.0 50.9 18.0 0.621 239 0.698

C2-S-B9 16 34.469 50.9 51.0 17.7 0.823 317 0.705

C2-S-B9 17 30.975 51.2 51.0 17.7 0.746 286 0.630

C2-S-B9 18 32.196 51.0 51.1 17.8 0.866 332 0.653

C2-S-B9 19 31.485 51.1 51.1 18.3 0.654 251 0.622

C2-S-B9 20 32.250 51.0 51.1 18.2 0.397 152 0.641

C2-S-B9 21 32.259 50.9 50.9 18.1 0.739 285 0.647

C2-S-B9 22 33.574 51.1 50.8 18.2 0.784 302 0.668

C2-S-B9 23 31.732 51.0 51.4 18.0 0.652 249 0.635

C2-S-B9 24 33.870 51.1 51.0 18.1 0.964 371 0.678

C2-S-B9 25 32.891 51.0 51.1 18.0 0.533 205 0.659

C2-S-B10 3 31.679 50.9 51.0 18.0 1.157 445 0.630

C2-S-B10 4 33.802 51.0 51.0 18.3 1.077 415 0.659

C2-S-B10 5 33.505 50.9 51.0 18.3 1.077 415 0.654

C2-S-B10 6 33.967 51.0 51.0 18.3 1.167 449 0.662

C2-S-B10 9 33.642 50.9 50.9 17.9 1.060 409 0.675

C2-S-B10 10 33.408 50.9 50.9 18.1 1.101 425 0.661

C2-S-B10 11 31.356 51.0 51.1 18.0 0.881 338 0.622

C2-S-B10 12 31.685 51.2 50.9 18.2 1.105 424 0.621

C2-S-B10 15 34.503 50.9 50.9 18.0 1.005 388 0.689

C2-S-B10 16 31.866 51.0 50.9 17.9 1.058 408 0.638

C2-S-B10 17 31.696 50.9 50.9 18.1 0.862 332 0.629

C2-S-B10 18 30.487 51.2 50.9 18.2 0.841 323 0.599

C2-S-B11 3 35.416 50.9 51.1 18.4 1.046 402 0.688

C2-S-B11 4 35.600 51.3 51.0 18.5 1.031 394 0.685

Page 257: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

257

Experiment 2 Data

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm 3)

C2-S-B11 5 34.947 51.0 51.1 18.5 1.109 426 0.673

C2-S-B11 6 34.183 51.1 51.1 18.5 0.839 321 0.656

C2-S-B11 9 35.512 50.9 50.8 18.4 1.161 449 0.692

C2-S-B11 10 36.680 51.3 51.1 18.4 1.300 496 0.707

C2-S-B11 11 34.314 51.0 50.8 18.5 1.073 414 0.665

C2-S-B11 12 34.542 51.4 51.1 18.4 0.885 337 0.663

C2-S-B11 15 33.948 51.0 50.8 18.5 1.017 392 0.657

C2-S-B11 16 33.379 51.0 50.8 18.6 0.884 341 0.643

C2-S-B11 17 33.150 51.0 50.8 18.6 1.031 398 0.639

C2-S-B11 18 32.618 51.0 51.0 18.6 0.973 374 0.627

C2-S-B12 3 35.176 51.3 50.9 18.5 0.849 325 0.678

C2-S-B12 4 34.547 51.1 51.1 18.8 1.092 418 0.656

C2-S-B12 5 32.283 51.2 51.0 18.5 0.772 296 0.621

C2-S-B12 6 34.212 51.0 50.9 18.6 1.073 413 0.660

C2-S-B12 9 36.307 50.9 51.1 18.5 1.101 423 0.702

C2-S-B12 10 33.261 51.0 50.9 18.5 0.646 249 0.645

C2-S-B12 11 33.477 50.9 51.0 18.5 0.965 372 0.648

C2-S-B12 12 36.289 51.0 51.0 18.5 1.440 554 0.703

C2-S-B12 15 33.093 51.2 50.9 18.5 0.899 345 0.639

C2-S-B12 16 34.333 50.9 50.9 18.7 0.847 327 0.660

C2-S-B12 17 34.143 51.0 50.9 18.5 1.121 432 0.661

C2-S-B12 18 34.263 50.9 51.0 18.5 0.997 384 0.662

C2-S-B13 3 31.809 51.0 50.9 17.4 1.058 408 0.657

C2-S-B13 4 31.475 51.1 50.9 17.4 1.000 385 0.651

C2-S-B13 5 32.239 51.0 51.0 17.5 1.239 477 0.662

C2-S-B13 6 27.939 51.0 50.9 17.1 0.934 360 0.588

C2-S-B13 9 31.435 51.0 51.1 16.9 0.762 293 0.666

C2-S-B13 10 27.775 51.0 51.0 16.7 0.975 375 0.596

C2-S-B13 11 29.956 51.0 51.0 17.1 1.220 469 0.629

C2-S-B13 12 30.531 51.0 51.0 17.5 1.227 472 0.627

C2-S-B13 15 30.037 51.1 51.0 16.9 1.181 454 0.638

C2-S-B13 16 30.908 50.9 51.0 17.3 1.127 434 0.642

Page 258: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

258

Appendix D

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm 3)

C2-S-B13 17 29.922 51.0 51.1 17.5 0.662 255 0.613

C2-S-B13 18 29.197 51.0 50.9 16.8 1.085 419 0.625

C2-S-B14 3 29.641 51.0 50.9 17.0 1.124 433 0.626

C2-S-B14 4 30.655 51.0 51.0 17.3 1.094 421 0.637

C2-S-B14 5 33.081 50.9 51.0 17.4 0.947 365 0.684

C2-S-B14 6 35.206 51.1 51.0 17.1 1.183 454 0.737

C2-S-B14 9 32.394 51.0 51.0 17.2 0.859 331 0.676

C2-S-B14 10 30.295 51.0 50.9 17.4 1.008 389 0.628

C2-S-B14 11 30.795 51.0 51.0 17.1 1.094 421 0.646

C2-S-B14 12 28.825 51.0 51.0 16.8 0.823 317 0.617

C2-S-B14 15 29.879 50.9 50.9 17.3 0.821 316 0.623

C2-S-B14 16 31.211 51.0 51.1 17.1 0.955 367 0.654

C2-S-B14 17 30.841 51.0 51.0 17.7 0.613 236 0.625

C2-S-B14 18 31.242 50.9 50.9 17.6 1.063 410 0.638

C2-S-B15 3 31.362 51.1 51.0 17.2 1.126 432 0.653

C2-S-B15 4 27.790 51.1 51.0 17.0 0.751 289 0.587

C2-S-B15 5 32.476 51.0 51.1 17.4 1.108 425 0.668

C2-S-B15 6 29.835 51.0 51.0 17.2 0.859 331 0.623

C2-S-B15 9 30.240 51.0 50.7 17.2 0.947 366 0.635

C2-S-B15 10 31.676 51.0 50.9 17.4 0.813 313 0.653

C2-S-B15 11 30.727 51.0 50.9 17.2 1.020 393 0.643

C2-S-B15 12 28.741 50.9 51.0 17.3 0.735 283 0.596

C2-S-B15 15 32.020 50.9 50.9 17.6 0.661 255 0.657

C2-S-B15 16 28.367 50.9 51.0 17.1 0.636 245 0.596

C2-S-B15 17 30.500 50.9 51.0 17.3 0.952 366 0.632

C2-S-B15 18 30.656 51.0 51.0 17.2 1.239 477 0.639

C2-TC-B1 1 29.740 50.1 48.7 17.9 0.594 244 0.644

C2-TC-B1 2 31.421 49.0 50.4 18.1 0.863 349 0.663

C2-TC-B1 3 31.063 50.2 50.4 18.0 0.796 315 0.642

C2-TC-B1 4 31.140 50.2 50.5 17.9 0.534 211 0.649

C2-TC-B1 5 29.296 50.3 50.5 17.9 0.578 228 0.609

C2-TC-B1 6 30.170 50.2 50.5 17.8 0.663 262 0.630

Page 259: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

259

Experiment 2 Data

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm 3)

C2-TC-B1 7 27.926 50.1 50.3 18.2 0.166 66 0.573

C2-TC-B1 8 32.966 49.4 50.4 18.1 1.036 416 0.689

C2-TC-B1 9 30.833 50.1 50.4 18.0 0.683 270 0.640

C2-TC-B1 10 32.156 50.0 50.3 18.1 0.707 281 0.665

C2-TC-B1 11 30.475 50.1 50.3 18.1 0.665 264 0.629

C2-TC-B1 12 28.738 50.1 50.2 18.2 0.527 209 0.591

C2-TC-B1 13 25.681 50.2 50.5 17.7 0.091 36 0.541

C2-TC-B1 14 32.800 50.4 50.4 18.2 0.821 323 0.670

C2-TC-B1 15 33.911 50.0 50.4 18.0 0.949 377 0.705

C2-TC-B1 16 33.329 49.8 50.3 18.5 0.976 389 0.679

C2-TC-B1 17 32.289 49.9 50.3 17.9 0.699 278 0.676

C2-TC-B1 18 31.042 49.9 50.5 17.9 0.542 215 0.648

C2-TC-B1 19 30.887 50.9 50.4 18.6 0.182 71 0.610

C2-TC-B1 20 31.566 49.9 50.4 18.4 0.538 214 0.645

C2-TC-B1 21 33.948 49.9 50.4 18.4 0.652 259 0.693

C2-TC-B1 22 30.800 50.1 50.3 18.5 0.537 213 0.624

C2-TC-B1 23 32.592 49.9 50.4 18.4 0.546 217 0.663

C2-TC-B1 24 30.267 49.7 50.4 18.5 0.410 163 0.615

C2-TC-B1 25 32.405 51.2 50.4 18.7 0.138 54 0.634

C2-TC-B2 1 32.983 49.5 49.8 18.3 0.850 345 0.691

C2-TC-B2 2 31.631 49.9 49.9 18.3 0.682 274 0.655

C2-TC-B2 3 31.411 49.9 50.0 18.2 0.833 333 0.653

C2-TC-B2 4 31.338 49.9 49.9 18.3 0.667 268 0.650

C2-TC-B2 5 30.158 49.9 49.7 18.5 0.542 219 0.623

C2-TC-B2 6 30.912 50.0 49.9 18.4 0.613 246 0.638

C2-TC-B2 7 30.357 50.6 49.9 18.5 0.507 201 0.613

C2-TC-B2 8 31.475 49.9 49.9 18.5 0.794 319 0.645

C2-TC-B2 9 30.231 50.1 50.0 18.3 0.759 303 0.624

C2-TC-B2 10 30.587 49.9 50.0 18.4 0.873 350 0.629

C2-TC-B2 11 33.256 50.0 50.1 18.5 0.775 310 0.679

C2-TC-B2 12 30.122 49.9 49.9 18.4 0.655 263 0.621

C2-TC-B2 13 31.121 50.7 49.9 18.6 0.591 234 0.626

Page 260: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

260

Appendix D

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm 3)

C2-TC-B2 14 29.642 49.9 49.9 18.5 0.573 230 0.608

C2-TC-B2 15 29.665 50.0 49.9 18.5 0.677 271 0.608

C2-TC-B2 16 32.153 50.0 50.0 18.6 0.844 338 0.656

C2-TC-B2 17 32.298 50.0 49.9 18.7 0.901 361 0.654

C2-TC-B2 18 31.878 49.8 49.9 18.5 0.882 355 0.657

C2-TC-B2 19 32.990 50.8 49.9 18.6 0.663 261 0.660

C2-TC-B2 20 29.631 49.9 49.9 18.8 0.273 110 0.598

C2-TC-B2 21 31.447 49.8 50.1 18.7 0.610 245 0.638

C2-TC-B2 22 32.759 50.3 49.9 18.7 0.765 305 0.661

C2-TC-B2 23 36.624 49.9 49.8 18.7 0.657 264 0.744

C2-TC-B2 24 32.287 49.8 49.7 18.7 0.704 284 0.661

C2-TC-B2 25 33.931 51.4 49.9 19.1 0.222 87 0.656

C2-TC-B3 1 30.120 49.8 49.9 18.3 0.833 335 0.621

C2-TC-B3 2 29.896 49.8 49.9 18.3 0.813 327 0.617

C2-TC-B3 3 32.459 49.9 50.0 18.1 0.802 321 0.676

C2-TC-B3 4 29.916 50.1 50.0 18.2 0.976 390 0.617

C2-TC-B3 5 29.813 49.9 50.0 18.2 0.831 333 0.619

C2-TC-B3 6 30.083 50.1 49.8 18.4 0.904 363 0.618

C2-TC-B3 7 31.919 50.6 50.0 18.4 0.987 390 0.646

C2-TC-B3 8 31.325 50.0 49.8 18.3 0.830 333 0.647

C2-TC-B3 9 31.647 50.0 49.8 18.2 1.102 442 0.656

C2-TC-B3 10 29.792 50.0 50.0 18.2 0.832 332 0.616

C2-TC-B3 11 32.207 50.0 49.9 18.3 0.880 353 0.665

C2-TC-B3 12 31.071 50.0 50.0 18.3 0.914 366 0.640

C2-TC-B3 13 34.107 50.7 50.0 18.3 0.952 376 0.690

C2-TC-B3 14 30.797 49.9 50.0 18.4 0.793 318 0.630

C2-TC-B3 15 32.856 50.1 50.0 18.3 1.050 419 0.674

C2-TC-B3 16 34.611 50.0 49.9 18.3 1.039 416 0.712

C2-TC-B3 17 31.334 49.9 49.9 18.4 0.802 322 0.644

C2-TC-B3 18 32.279 50.0 50.0 18.3 0.934 374 0.665

C2-TC-B3 19 31.924 50.9 49.9 18.4 0.937 369 0.642

C2-TC-B3 20 32.462 50.0 49.9 18.7 0.505 202 0.653

Page 261: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

261

Experiment 2 Data

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm 3)

C2-TC-B3 21 34.379 50.0 50.0 18.7 0.684 273 0.691

C2-TC-B3 22 32.432 50.0 50.0 18.6 0.820 328 0.657

C2-TC-B3 23 30.555 49.9 49.9 18.5 0.745 299 0.624

C2-TC-B3 24 34.201 49.9 49.8 18.6 1.089 438 0.697

C2-TC-B3 25 35.506 51.1 49.9 18.7 0.940 369 0.702

C2-TC-B4 1 29.043 49.9 50.0 17.6 0.576 231 0.624

C2-TC-B4 2 29.291 49.9 49.9 17.8 0.658 264 0.622

C2-TC-B4 3 29.130 49.9 49.9 17.6 0.739 296 0.626

C2-TC-B4 4 28.720 50.0 49.8 17.3 0.418 168 0.627

C2-TC-B4 5 29.745 49.9 50.0 17.7 0.828 332 0.633

C2-TC-B4 6 29.390 50.0 49.9 17.7 0.689 276 0.625

C2-TC-B4 7 30.582 50.4 50.1 17.7 0.652 258 0.645

C2-TC-B4 8 29.029 50.0 49.9 17.5 0.658 264 0.624

C2-TC-B4 9 31.050 50.0 49.9 17.7 0.904 362 0.663

C2-TC-B4 10 31.113 50.0 49.9 17.9 0.534 214 0.654

C2-TC-B4 11 30.042 50.1 49.9 17.6 0.662 265 0.641

C2-TC-B4 12 30.649 50.0 49.9 17.6 0.790 317 0.656

C2-TC-B4 13 29.765 50.4 49.9 18.0 0.661 263 0.619

C2-TC-B4 14 29.682 50.1 49.9 17.9 0.695 278 0.624

C2-TC-B4 15 31.526 49.9 50.0 17.9 0.876 351 0.665

C2-TC-B4 16 24.852 50.0 50.1 18.0 1.067 426 0.519

C2-TC-B4 17 29.986 49.9 50.0 17.8 0.837 335 0.636

C2-TC-B4 18 31.083 50.0 50.1 17.9 0.751 300 0.652

C2-TC-B4 19 30.369 50.4 50.0 18.1 0.709 281 0.626

C2-TC-B4 20 29.923 49.9 49.6 17.9 0.494 200 0.635

C2-TC-B4 21 32.315 49.9 49.9 18.1 0.726 292 0.674

C2-TC-B4 22 31.661 50.0 50.0 18.3 0.678 271 0.650

C2-TC-B4 23 30.714 49.9 49.9 18.3 0.775 311 0.632

C2-TC-B4 24 31.633 49.9 49.9 18.5 0.799 320 0.646

C2-TC-B4 25 31.956 50.6 50.6 18.5 0.658 257 0.633

C2-TC-B5 1 29.606 49.8 50.0 17.7 0.654 263 0.635

C2-TC-B5 2 30.839 49.7 49.9 18.1 0.540 218 0.648

Page 262: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

262

Appendix D

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm 3)

C2-TC-B5 3 31.691 50.0 49.8 17.7 0.850 342 0.677

C2-TC-B5 4 30.235 49.8 49.7 18.2 0.472 191 0.633

C2-TC-B5 5 28.987 49.9 49.9 18.1 0.712 286 0.606

C2-TC-B5 6 29.144 50.0 49.8 18.1 0.598 240 0.611

C2-TC-B5 7 26.156 50.3 50.0 18.0 0.304 121 0.546

C2-TC-B5 8 28.760 50.0 49.9 17.7 0.600 241 0.612

C2-TC-B5 9 29.734 49.8 49.8 17.7 0.782 315 0.639

C2-TC-B5 10 28.915 49.8 50.0 18.0 0.442 178 0.608

C2-TC-B5 11 27.207 50.0 49.8 18.3 0.385 154 0.563

C2-TC-B5 12 29.894 49.9 49.8 18.0 0.494 199 0.631

C2-TC-B5 13 29.617 50.2 49.8 18.2 0.433 173 0.613

C2-TC-B5 14 29.937 49.9 50.1 18.3 0.498 199 0.615

C2-TC-B5 15 30.229 49.8 49.8 17.6 0.658 265 0.654

C2-TC-B5 16 29.415 50.1 49.9 18.4 0.688 275 0.604

C2-TC-B5 17 29.170 49.8 49.9 18.4 0.720 289 0.599

C2-TC-B5 18 30.945 50.0 50.0 18.5 0.783 313 0.630

C2-TC-B5 19 33.208 50.4 49.8 18.4 0.673 269 0.676

C2-TC-B5 20 29.743 50.0 49.6 18.3 0.595 240 0.617

C2-TC-B5 21 30.422 49.8 49.7 18.6 0.549 222 0.623

C2-TC-B5 22 29.813 49.8 49.9 18.5 0.596 240 0.610

C2-TC-B5 23 30.435 49.8 49.7 18.6 0.574 232 0.623

C2-TC-B5 24 29.615 49.8 49.8 18.6 0.508 205 0.605

C2-TC-B5 25 30.207 50.6 49.7 18.6 0.568 226 0.609

C2-TC-B6 1 30.514 49.8 49.9 18.0 0.566 228 0.642

C2-TC-B6 2 31.094 50.1 49.8 18.1 0.657 263 0.649

C2-TC-B6 3 30.267 49.9 49.8 18.0 0.614 247 0.637

C2-TC-B6 4 30.802 49.7 49.8 18.0 0.593 240 0.651

C2-TC-B6 5 29.912 49.9 49.9 18.2 0.774 311 0.622

C2-TC-B6 6 31.609 49.9 49.9 18.2 0.687 276 0.659

C2-TC-B6 7 30.235 50.3 49.9 18.3 0.615 245 0.620

C2-TC-B6 8 30.412 50.0 49.8 18.2 0.659 265 0.631

C2-TC-B6 9 32.048 49.8 49.8 18.2 0.772 311 0.668

Page 263: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

263

Experiment 2 Data

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm 3)

C2-TC-B6 10 31.153 49.8 49.9 18.1 0.674 271 0.651

C2-TC-B6 11 31.131 49.9 49.8 18.3 0.672 270 0.647

C2-TC-B6 12 31.308 49.9 49.8 18.1 0.703 283 0.654

C2-TC-B6 13 29.775 50.4 49.8 18.5 0.317 126 0.603

C2-TC-B6 14 31.030 49.9 49.8 18.4 0.603 243 0.640

C2-TC-B6 15 31.928 49.9 49.9 18.2 0.839 337 0.662

C2-TC-B6 16 33.285 49.8 50.1 18.4 0.811 325 0.684

C2-TC-B6 17 32.999 50.1 49.9 18.5 0.778 311 0.673

C2-TC-B6 18 31.146 49.9 50.5 18.5 0.627 249 0.630

C2-TC-B6 19 30.986 49.8 49.9 18.5 0.310 125 0.636

C2-TC-B6 20 28.666 49.8 49.8 18.7 0.207 83 0.584

C2-TC-B6 21 30.234 49.7 50.0 18.6 0.284 114 0.615

C2-TC-B6 22 30.731 49.9 49.8 18.5 0.578 233 0.629

C2-TC-B6 23 31.427 49.8 49.8 18.6 0.658 265 0.642

C2-TC-B6 24 31.515 49.9 49.9 18.6 0.704 283 0.642

C2-TC-B6 25 32.233 50.7 49.8 18.7 0.432 171 0.645

C2-TC-B7 1 31.766 50.9 51.0 17.8 0.757 292 0.645

C2-TC-B7 2 30.210 51.0 51.0 17.7 0.583 224 0.616

C2-TC-B7 3 32.134 51.0 50.9 17.6 0.810 312 0.661

C2-TC-B7 4 30.178 51.4 50.9 17.6 0.776 296 0.617

C2-TC-B7 5 31.304 51.0 51.0 17.7 0.874 336 0.640

C2-TC-B7 6 30.684 51.0 51.0 17.8 0.790 304 0.625

C2-TC-B7 7 30.766 51.1 50.9 17.7 0.613 236 0.628

C2-TC-B7 8 31.319 51.0 50.9 17.8 0.567 218 0.636

C2-TC-B7 9 29.591 51.0 51.1 17.4 0.829 318 0.615

C2-TC-B7 10 29.891 51.0 51.0 17.6 0.584 225 0.613

C2-TC-B7 11 30.488 51.1 51.0 17.4 0.835 321 0.631

C2-TC-B7 12 33.130 51.1 51.0 17.6 0.780 300 0.681

C2-TC-B7 13 31.814 51.0 51.0 17.7 0.816 314 0.651

C2-TC-B7 14 30.592 51.0 51.0 17.7 0.554 213 0.626

C2-TC-B7 15 29.773 51.0 51.1 17.4 0.838 322 0.617

C2-TC-B7 16 29.490 51.1 51.0 17.5 0.605 232 0.608

Page 264: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

264

Appendix D

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm 3)

C2-TC-B7 17 30.523 51.0 51.0 17.6 0.676 260 0.627

C2-TC-B7 18 31.057 51.0 50.9 17.6 0.782 302 0.642

C2-TC-B7 19 32.666 51.0 51.1 17.9 0.717 275 0.658

C2-TC-B7 20 32.755 51.0 51.0 18.3 0.344 132 0.647

C2-TC-B7 21 30.097 51.0 51.0 17.8 0.558 215 0.611

C2-TC-B7 22 30.931 51.0 50.9 17.8 0.670 258 0.628

C2-TC-B7 23 32.001 51.1 50.9 17.8 0.706 272 0.650

C2-TC-B7 24 32.628 51.0 51.0 17.6 0.813 312 0.669

C2-TC-B7 25 33.652 51.0 50.9 18.4 0.347 133 0.663

C2-TC-B8 1 30.559 50.9 51.0 17.7 0.528 203 0.626

C2-TC-B8 2 33.748 51.1 50.9 17.9 0.904 348 0.684

C2-TC-B8 3 32.484 51.0 51.0 17.6 0.601 231 0.670

C2-TC-B8 4 32.829 51.0 51.0 17.9 0.870 334 0.665

C2-TC-B8 5 31.997 50.8 51.0 17.7 0.898 346 0.656

C2-TC-B8 6 31.763 51.0 51.0 17.6 1.010 388 0.652

C2-TC-B8 7 31.908 51.1 51.0 17.8 0.411 158 0.649

C2-TC-B8 8 33.848 51.0 50.9 17.9 0.872 336 0.684

C2-TC-B8 9 31.359 51.0 51.0 17.8 0.697 268 0.639

C2-TC-B8 10 32.622 51.0 50.9 17.8 0.898 346 0.663

C2-TC-B8 11 34.079 50.9 51.0 18.0 0.976 376 0.688

C2-TC-B8 12 33.014 51.1 51.0 18.0 0.811 311 0.664

C2-TC-B8 13 33.471 51.0 51.0 18.1 0.608 234 0.669

C2-TC-B8 14 31.855 50.9 50.9 18.1 0.489 189 0.641

C2-TC-B8 15 33.029 51.0 50.9 18.0 0.839 323 0.667

C2-TC-B8 16 31.267 51.1 51.0 17.4 0.899 345 0.648

C2-TC-B8 17 33.295 51.1 51.0 17.7 0.972 373 0.681

C2-TC-B8 18 31.579 51.0 51.0 17.7 0.600 230 0.647

C2-TC-B8 19 30.808 51.1 51.0 17.7 0.390 150 0.629

C2-TC-B8 20 31.862 51.0 51.0 18.3 0.179 69 0.629

C2-TC-B8 21 31.142 51.0 50.8 17.7 0.440 170 0.639

C2-TC-B8 22 33.156 51.0 50.9 17.8 0.637 245 0.675

C2-TC-B8 23 31.775 51.0 50.9 17.8 0.534 206 0.648

Page 265: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

265

Experiment 2 Data

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm 3)

C2-TC-B8 24 31.109 51.1 51.0 17.6 0.499 192 0.641

C2-TC-B8 25 31.039 51.1 51.0 17.7 0.263 101 0.632

C2-TC-B9 1 28.693 51.1 51.0 17.7 0.661 254 0.585

C2-TC-B9 2 29.022 51.0 51.0 17.8 0.682 262 0.591

C2-TC-B9 3 30.201 51.0 51.0 17.7 0.649 250 0.618

C2-TC-B9 4 30.784 51.1 50.9 17.7 0.698 268 0.629

C2-TC-B9 5 33.013 51.1 51.0 18.0 0.832 319 0.664

C2-TC-B9 6 32.807 51.0 51.1 17.6 0.738 283 0.674

C2-TC-B9 7 31.754 51.0 51.1 17.7 0.779 299 0.649

C2-TC-B9 8 30.780 51.1 51.0 17.9 0.528 203 0.623

C2-TC-B9 9 31.157 51.0 50.9 17.7 0.561 216 0.637

C2-TC-B9 10 30.997 51.1 51.0 17.8 0.677 260 0.630

C2-TC-B9 11 31.183 51.0 51.0 17.7 0.818 314 0.638

C2-TC-B9 12 31.553 51.0 50.9 17.8 0.723 279 0.645

C2-TC-B9 13 31.439 51.1 51.1 17.8 0.527 202 0.638

C2-TC-B9 14 29.571 51.0 51.1 17.7 0.552 212 0.603

C2-TC-B9 15 30.439 51.0 50.9 17.8 0.659 254 0.619

C2-TC-B9 16 31.365 51.0 50.9 17.6 0.787 303 0.646

C2-TC-B9 17 31.577 51.0 50.9 17.7 0.885 341 0.646

C2-TC-B9 18 32.727 51.0 50.8 17.8 1.064 410 0.668

C2-TC-B9 19 31.544 51.2 50.9 17.9 0.782 301 0.638

C2-TC-B9 20 29.474 51.2 51.0 18.1 0.166 64 0.588

C2-TC-B9 21 31.339 51.0 50.9 18.0 0.486 187 0.630

C2-TC-B9 22 31.772 50.9 51.1 18.1 0.794 305 0.635

C2-TC-B9 23 31.462 51.0 51.0 18.1 0.769 296 0.629

C2-TC-B9 24 32.817 51.0 51.1 18.2 0.676 259 0.652

C2-TC-B9 25 33.506 51.1 50.9 18.1 0.615 236 0.670

C2-TC-B10 3 34.331 51.1 51.0 18.2 0.841 323 0.675

C2-TC-B10 4 32.653 50.8 51.0 18.1 0.852 329 0.648

C2-TC-B10 5 33.574 51.0 51.0 18.3 0.798 306 0.656

C2-TC-B10 6 35.523 50.9 51.0 18.5 1.008 389 0.690

C2-TC-B10 9 37.327 50.9 50.9 18.4 1.120 433 0.729

Page 266: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

266

Appendix D

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm 3)

C2-TC-B10 10 33.762 50.9 50.9 18.4 0.868 335 0.661

C2-TC-B10 11 35.395 51.4 51.0 18.7 0.910 347 0.675

C2-TC-B10 12 34.961 50.9 51.0 18.4 0.876 338 0.683

C2-TC-B10 15 35.742 51.0 51.2 18.5 0.823 315 0.689

C2-TC-B10 16 36.468 50.8 50.9 18.5 0.898 347 0.710

C2-TC-B10 17 35.031 50.9 50.9 18.5 0.894 345 0.680

C2-TC-B10 18 32.541 50.9 51.1 18.5 0.652 251 0.630

C2-TC-B11 3 32.752 50.9 51.0 18.5 0.815 314 0.636

C2-TC-B11 4 35.449 51.1 50.9 18.6 0.887 341 0.685

C2-TC-B11 5 33.476 51.1 51.0 18.4 0.868 333 0.651

C2-TC-B11 6 33.420 51.0 50.9 18.3 0.782 301 0.656

C2-TC-B11 9 35.175 50.9 50.9 18.5 1.033 399 0.683

C2-TC-B11 10 35.403 50.9 51.0 18.7 1.008 388 0.681

C2-TC-B11 11 36.922 51.0 50.9 18.6 0.903 348 0.712

C2-TC-B11 12 34.572 51.0 51.0 18.6 0.870 335 0.667

C2-TC-B11 15 37.275 50.9 51.0 18.7 0.760 293 0.717

C2-TC-B11 16 33.985 50.9 50.9 18.7 0.889 343 0.656

C2-TC-B11 17 36.348 51.0 50.9 18.8 0.859 331 0.697

C2-TC-B11 18 34.763 50.9 50.9 18.8 0.724 279 0.666

C2-TC-B12 3 33.247 51.0 50.8 18.3 0.782 302 0.655

C2-TC-B12 4 34.001 50.9 51.0 18.4 0.724 279 0.663

C2-TC-B12 5 34.482 51.1 51.0 18.5 0.761 293 0.667

C2-TC-B12 6 35.894 51.1 50.8 18.5 0.887 342 0.696

C2-TC-B12 9 34.799 51.1 50.9 18.3 1.014 390 0.682

C2-TC-B12 10 33.038 50.9 51.2 18.4 0.706 271 0.643

C2-TC-B12 11 32.266 51.1 51.0 18.3 0.706 271 0.631

C2-TC-B12 12 33.403 50.9 51.0 18.4 0.848 327 0.652

C2-TC-B12 15 32.675 50.9 50.9 18.1 0.594 229 0.651

C2-TC-B12 16 32.116 50.9 50.9 18.1 0.767 296 0.640

C2-TC-B12 17 33.089 51.1 50.8 18.3 0.613 236 0.651

C2-TC-B12 18 31.553 50.9 51.0 17.9 0.621 240 0.634

C2-TC-B13 3 31.789 51.0 50.9 17.6 1.048 404 0.650

Page 267: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

267

Experiment 2 Data

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm 3)

C2-TC-B13 4 33.134 51.0 50.8 17.9 1.315 508 0.669

C2-TC-B13 5 33.770 50.9 51.0 17.9 1.191 459 0.681

C2-TC-B13 6 32.594 51.0 51.0 17.8 0.998 384 0.659

C2-TC-B13 9 31.775 51.0 50.9 17.1 1.152 444 0.668

C2-TC-B13 10 31.198 51.0 51.0 17.3 0.657 253 0.649

C2-TC-B13 11 31.352 50.9 50.9 17.7 0.711 274 0.639

C2-TC-B13 12 31.602 51.0 50.9 17.8 0.762 294 0.640

C2-TC-B13 15 30.748 50.9 50.9 17.4 0.805 311 0.637

C2-TC-B13 16 31.089 51.0 51.0 17.1 0.690 265 0.652

C2-TC-B13 17 32.401 51.0 51.0 17.7 1.054 406 0.657

C2-TC-B13 18 32.370 51.0 51.0 17.5 1.079 415 0.665

C2-TC-B14 3 32.114 50.9 50.9 17.8 0.684 264 0.652

C2-TC-B14 4 31.371 50.9 50.8 17.6 1.244 480 0.644

C2-TC-B14 5 32.485 51.1 50.8 17.8 1.139 439 0.657

C2-TC-B14 6 30.565 51.0 51.0 17.4 0.953 367 0.630

C2-TC-B14 9 29.916 51.0 51.0 17.1 0.942 362 0.629

C2-TC-B14 10 29.002 51.0 50.9 17.7 0.916 353 0.589

C2-TC-B14 11 29.439 51.0 50.9 16.8 1.028 396 0.629

C2-TC-B14 12 28.502 50.9 50.9 17.3 1.059 409 0.593

C2-TC-B14 15 30.184 51.0 50.8 17.3 0.949 366 0.626

C2-TC-B14 16 30.283 51.0 50.9 17.3 0.887 342 0.629

C2-TC-B14 17 33.030 51.0 50.9 17.6 1.012 390 0.674

C2-TC-B14 18 31.625 50.9 51.0 17.9 0.886 341 0.635

C2-TC-B15 3 34.208 51.0 51.0 17.6 1.267 487 0.701

C2-TC-B15 4 31.846 51.0 51.0 17.9 0.645 248 0.639

C2-TC-B15 5 32.081 50.9 50.9 17.9 0.858 331 0.647

C2-TC-B15 6 32.066 51.0 50.9 17.8 0.872 336 0.648

C2-TC-B15 9 33.719 51.0 50.9 17.8 1.090 420 0.682

C2-TC-B15 10 33.535 51.0 51.0 17.8 1.014 390 0.679

C2-TC-B15 11 31.065 50.9 50.9 17.8 0.791 305 0.629

C2-TC-B15 12 32.788 51.0 51.0 18.2 0.978 376 0.648

C2-TC-B15 15 31.852 51.0 51.0 17.9 0.981 378 0.639

Page 268: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

268

Appendix D

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm 3)

C2-TC-B15 16 33.111 50.9 50.9 17.8 0.916 354 0.673

C2-TC-B15 17 32.981 50.9 50.9 17.8 0.921 355 0.667

C2-TC-B15 18 32.334 51.0 50.9 18.2 0.807 311 0.641

Page 269: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

269

Experiment 2 Data

Table D-2. Individual Experiment 2 moisture test results.

Board Wet Weight Dry Weight Moisture ContentName (g) (g) (%)

C2-BN-B1 31.660 29.916 5.8

C2-BN-B2 29.266 27.661 5.8

C2-BN-B3 33.631 31.847 5.6

C2-BN-B4 30.793 29.045 6.0

C2-BN-B5 29.385 27.726 6.0

C2-BN-B6 29.906 28.227 5.9

C2-BN-B7 34.482 32.595 5.8

C2-BN-B8 33.036 31.199 5.9

C2-BN-B9 32.026 30.230 5.9

C2-BN-B10 30.479 28.473 7.0

C2-BN-B11 31.238 29.181 7.0

C2-BN-B12 30.215 28.225 7.1

C2-BN-B13 35.622 33.436 6.5

C2-BN-B14 32.853 30.791 6.7

C2-BN-B15 32.212 30.190 6.7

C2-C-B4 29.569 27.921 5.9

C2-C-B5 31.951 30.204 5.8

C2-C-B6 31.802 30.047 5.8

C2-C-B7 34.765 32.879 5.7

C2-C-B8 30.939 29.238 5.8

C2-C-B9 30.532 28.865 5.8

C2-C-B10 35.055 33.085 6.0

C2-C-B11 34.183 32.302 5.8

C2-C-B12 34.591 32.649 5.9

C2-C-B13 32.918 30.800 6.9

C2-C-B14 33.186 31.088 6.7

C2-C-B15 33.294 31.158 6.9

C2-C-B16 33.031 30.926 6.8

C2-C-B17 34.710 32.527 6.7

C2-C-B18 33.794 31.667 6.7

Page 270: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

270

Appendix D

Board Wet Weight Dry Weight Moisture ContentName (g) (g) (%)

C2-CTC-B1 30.523 28.883 5.7

C2-CTC-B2 30.699 28.995 5.9

C2-CTC-B3 33.593 31.735 5.9

C2-CTC-B4 29.189 27.562 5.9

C2-CTC-B5 29.373 27.739 5.9

C2-CTC-B6 31.546 29.809 5.8

C2-CTC-B7 34.146 32.252 5.9

C2-CTC-B8 32.828 31.001 5.9

C2-CTC-B9 33.017 31.176 5.9

C2-CTC-B10 34.222 32.052 6.8

C2-CTC-B11 30.770 28.776 6.9

C2-CTC-B12 33.575 31.411 6.9

C2-CTC-B13 33.466 31.346 6.8

C2-CTC-B14 35.341 33.145 6.6

C2-CTC-B15 35.286 33.087 6.6

C2-L-B1 33.398 31.572 5.8

C2-L-B2 30.854 29.155 5.8

C2-L-B3 32.977 31.163 5.8

C2-L-B4 32.047 30.243 6.0

C2-L-B5 32.842 31.030 5.8

C2-L-B6 31.284 29.552 5.9

C2-L-B7 34.538 32.632 5.8

C2-L-B8 33.398 31.538 5.9

C2-L-B9 34.708 32.791 5.8

C2-L-B10 32.962 30.829 6.9

C2-L-B11 35.482 33.241 6.7

C2-L-B12 33.649 31.503 6.8

C2-L-B13 36.385 34.145 6.6

C2-L-B14 33.086 31.014 6.7

C2-L-B15 33.056 31.000 6.6

C2-S-B1 30.019 28.371 5.8

C2-S-B2 33.303 31.504 5.7

Page 271: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

271

Experiment 2 Data

Board Wet Weight Dry Weight Moisture ContentName (g) (g) (%)

C2-S-B3 28.172 26.622 5.8

C2-S-B4 31.197 29.484 5.8

C2-S-B5 31.786 30.038 5.8

C2-S-B6 30.463 28.777 5.9

C2-S-B7 32.285 30.469 6.0

C2-S-B8 35.441 33.489 5.8

C2-S-B9 33.353 31.496 5.9

C2-S-B10 30.383 28.376 7.1

C2-S-B11 30.866 28.834 7.0

C2-S-B12 29.471 27.541 7.0

C2-S-B13 34.135 32.017 6.6

C2-S-B14 31.992 29.997 6.7

C2-S-B15 33.962 31.841 6.7

C2-TC-B1 31.658 29.956 5.7

C2-TC-B2 35.064 33.255 5.4

C2-TC-B3 32.015 30.227 5.9

C2-TC-B4 28.234 26.651 5.9

C2-TC-B5 32.685 30.892 5.8

C2-TC-B6 30.157 28.502 5.8

C2-TC-B7 32.779 30.926 6.0

C2-TC-B8 33.874 31.997 5.9

C2-TC-B9 30.719 29.011 5.9

C2-TC-B10 33.004 30.922 6.7

C2-TC-B11 30.625 28.709 6.7

C2-TC-B12 30.112 28.213 6.7

C2-TC-B13 35.622 33.422 6.6

C2-TC-B14 31.773 29.783 6.7

C2-TC-B15 36.637 34.383 6.6

Page 272: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

272

Appendix E

Appendix E. Experiment 3 Data

Appendix E contains Experiment 3 data. Tables E-1 and E-2 includes internal

bond and moisture test results.

Table E-1. Experiment 3 individual internal bond test results.

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm3)

C2-BN-A1 3 33.225 50.9 50.8 18.2 0.681 263 0.660C2-BN-A1 4 33.115 50.9 50.8 18.2 0.582 225 0.658C2-BN-A1 5 33.563 50.9 50.9 18.0 0.733 284 0.674C2-BN-A1 6 32.670 50.9 50.9 18.1 0.688 266 0.650C2-BN-A1 9 33.365 50.8 50.8 18.0 0.750 290 0.670C2-BN-A1 10 32.527 50.9 50.8 18.1 0.760 294 0.648C2-BN-A1 11 35.509 50.9 50.9 18.2 0.772 299 0.705C2-BN-A1 12 34.450 50.9 50.9 18.0 0.844 326 0.690C2-BN-A1 15 32.830 50.9 50.9 18.3 0.433 167 0.646C2-BN-A1 16 33.682 50.9 50.8 18.5 0.970 375 0.659C2-BN-A1 17 34.471 50.9 50.9 18.4 0.540 209 0.675C2-BN-A1 18 33.606 50.9 50.9 18.6 0.438 169 0.652C2-BN-A2 3 34.752 50.9 50.9 18.1 1.116 431 0.691C2-BN-A2 4 34.289 50.8 50.8 18.4 1.060 411 0.674C2-BN-A2 5 33.837 50.9 50.9 18.3 0.845 327 0.667C2-BN-A2 6 31.751 50.9 50.9 18.2 0.539 208 0.630C2-BN-A2 9 30.561 50.9 50.8 18.2 0.689 267 0.608C2-BN-A2 10 32.523 50.9 50.8 18.2 0.511 198 0.644C2-BN-A2 11 32.085 50.9 50.9 18.2 0.895 346 0.636C2-BN-A2 12 33.211 50.8 50.9 18.3 0.889 344 0.656C2-BN-A2 15 32.738 50.9 50.8 18.1 0.793 307 0.652C2-BN-A2 16 29.347 50.9 50.9 18.3 0.610 236 0.577C2-BN-A2 17 32.960 50.9 50.8 18.2 0.804 311 0.654C2-BN-A2 18 33.531 50.9 50.8 18.1 0.457 177 0.670C2-BN-A3 3 32.775 50.9 50.9 18.2 0.546 211 0.650C2-BN-A3 4 31.216 50.8 50.9 18.2 0.793 307 0.620C2-BN-A3 5 31.205 50.8 50.8 18.2 0.634 245 0.620C2-BN-A3 6 33.564 50.9 50.8 18.3 0.981 380 0.664C2-BN-A3 9 32.840 50.9 50.8 18.2 0.955 370 0.651C2-BN-A3 10 32.705 50.8 50.9 18.4 0.831 321 0.642C2-BN-A3 11 31.710 50.8 50.9 18.3 0.744 288 0.625C2-BN-A3 12 35.276 50.8 50.8 18.5 0.964 373 0.689C2-BN-A3 15 33.867 50.8 50.9 18.3 0.666 258 0.668C2-BN-A3 16 31.136 50.9 50.8 18.5 0.637 247 0.608C2-BN-A3 17 33.264 50.9 50.8 18.3 0.983 380 0.655C2-BN-A3 18 34.570 50.8 50.8 18.4 0.787 305 0.679C2-BN-A4 3 32.526 51.1 51.0 18.2 0.897 344 0.640C2-BN-A4 4 32.695 51.1 51.0 18.2 0.793 304 0.643

Page 273: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

273

Experiment 3 Data

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm3)

C2-BN-A4 5 33.679 51.0 51.1 18.3 1.016 390 0.660C2-BN-A4 6 35.126 51.1 51.1 18.3 0.810 310 0.687C2-BN-A4 9 35.535 51.1 51.1 18.2 1.077 412 0.697C2-BN-A4 10 35.094 51.1 51.1 18.4 1.067 409 0.683C2-BN-A4 11 32.817 51.1 51.1 18.2 0.881 338 0.645C2-BN-A4 12 34.160 51.1 51.1 18.2 0.943 362 0.671C2-BN-A4 15 34.176 51.1 50.9 18.3 0.792 304 0.670C2-BN-A4 16 32.979 51.1 51.1 18.2 0.620 238 0.648C2-BN-A4 17 33.617 51.2 50.9 18.4 0.809 311 0.657C2-BN-A4 18 34.547 51.2 51.1 18.4 0.671 257 0.670C2-BN-A5 3 32.738 51.1 51.0 18.2 0.676 260 0.646C2-BN-A5 4 33.135 51.1 51.0 18.2 0.947 363 0.653C2-BN-A5 5 31.590 51.1 51.0 18.2 0.691 265 0.622C2-BN-A5 6 34.117 51.2 51.1 18.2 0.943 360 0.668C2-BN-A5 9 29.581 51.1 51.1 18.1 0.657 252 0.585C2-BN-A5 10 31.846 51.0 51.1 18.2 0.890 341 0.626C2-BN-A5 11 33.105 51.1 51.0 18.2 1.027 394 0.654C2-BN-A5 12 34.152 51.1 51.0 18.1 0.516 198 0.675C2-BN-A5 15 32.176 51.1 51.0 18.2 0.823 316 0.634C2-BN-A5 16 31.750 51.0 51.1 18.1 0.840 323 0.628C2-BN-A5 17 32.956 51.1 51.0 18.2 0.904 347 0.649C2-BN-A5 18 33.117 51.1 51.1 18.2 0.692 265 0.650C2-BN-A6 3 33.025 51.2 53.3 18.2 1.079 396 0.618C2-BN-A6 4 33.819 51.1 51.2 18.3 0.780 299 0.659C2-BN-A6 5 32.723 51.1 51.1 18.3 0.905 346 0.637C2-BN-A6 6 33.691 51.1 51.0 18.3 0.696 267 0.656C2-BN-A6 9 31.332 51.2 51.2 18.2 0.859 328 0.611C2-BN-A6 10 33.198 51.1 51.0 18.4 0.820 315 0.645C2-BN-A6 11 34.407 51.1 51.0 18.4 0.824 316 0.666C2-BN-A6 12 33.107 51.1 51.1 18.3 0.519 199 0.644C2-BN-A6 15 32.745 51.1 51.1 18.5 0.849 325 0.631C2-BN-A6 16 33.550 51.1 51.0 18.5 0.858 329 0.647C2-BN-A6 17 34.191 51.3 51.0 18.6 0.741 283 0.653C2-BN-A6 18 31.737 51.1 51.1 18.5 0.388 149 0.610C2-BN-A7 3 30.975 50.8 50.8 18.0 0.562 217 0.598C2-BN-A7 4 32.193 50.8 50.8 17.8 0.837 324 0.628C2-BN-A7 5 32.643 50.8 50.8 18.1 0.936 363 0.628C2-BN-A7 6 32.846 50.8 50.9 18.1 0.839 325 0.631C2-BN-A7 9 33.068 50.8 50.8 17.8 0.721 279 0.644C2-BN-A7 10 32.497 50.8 50.9 18.2 0.857 332 0.619C2-BN-A7 11 32.085 50.8 50.9 18.0 0.638 247 0.618C2-BN-A7 12 32.360 50.8 50.8 18.1 0.754 292 0.623C2-BN-A7 15 32.771 50.8 50.8 18.0 0.410 159 0.633C2-BN-A7 16 31.578 50.8 50.8 18.2 0.728 282 0.602C2-BN-A7 17 32.625 50.8 50.8 18.2 0.907 352 0.625C2-BN-A7 18 32.428 50.8 50.7 18.3 0.490 191 0.617C2-BN-A8 3 33.917 50.8 50.8 18.0 0.972 376 0.679C2-BN-A8 4 33.783 50.8 50.7 17.9 1.103 428 0.681C2-BN-A8 5 32.789 50.8 50.7 17.9 0.963 373 0.662C2-BN-A8 6 31.421 50.8 50.7 17.7 0.905 351 0.642C2-BN-A8 9 31.483 50.8 50.8 17.8 0.643 249 0.638

Page 274: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

274

Appendix E

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm3)

C2-BN-A8 10 31.281 50.8 50.8 18.0 0.932 361 0.628C2-BN-A8 11 32.836 50.8 50.8 17.8 0.732 284 0.665C2-BN-A8 12 33.380 50.8 50.8 18.1 0.908 352 0.665C2-BN-A8 15 32.513 50.7 50.7 17.7 0.613 238 0.665C2-BN-A8 16 32.463 50.9 50.8 17.8 0.915 354 0.658C2-BN-A8 17 31.424 50.9 50.8 18.2 0.642 249 0.624C2-BN-A8 18 30.565 50.8 50.8 18.0 0.369 143 0.612C2-BN-A9 3 33.693 50.8 50.8 18.0 0.786 305 0.700C2-BN-A9 4 33.113 50.8 50.9 17.9 0.996 386 0.689C2-BN-A9 5 30.922 50.9 50.8 18.0 0.718 278 0.640C2-BN-A9 6 34.070 50.8 50.9 17.9 1.123 434 0.708C2-BN-A9 9 30.185 50.8 50.8 18.0 0.377 146 0.628C2-BN-A9 10 31.146 50.9 50.8 17.8 0.991 384 0.652C2-BN-A9 11 30.523 50.8 50.9 17.8 0.781 302 0.638C2-BN-A9 12 33.442 50.8 50.8 18.1 0.832 322 0.689C2-BN-A9 15 32.244 50.8 50.7 18.1 0.275 107 0.668C2-BN-A9 16 32.962 50.8 50.7 18.3 0.872 338 0.674C2-BN-A9 17 33.485 50.8 50.8 18.2 0.902 350 0.688C2-BN-A9 18 33.147 50.8 50.8 18.1 0.786 304 0.684C2-C-A1 3 32.524 50.9 50.9 18.2 0.845 326 0.644C2-C-A1 4 33.106 50.9 50.9 18.3 0.859 331 0.650C2-C-A1 5 32.218 50.9 50.9 18.3 0.968 374 0.635C2-C-A1 6 32.438 50.8 50.9 18.2 0.871 337 0.642C2-C-A1 9 33.480 50.9 50.9 18.4 0.906 350 0.657C2-C-A1 10 34.477 50.8 50.8 18.4 1.064 412 0.675C2-C-A1 11 30.391 50.9 50.9 18.3 0.629 243 0.600C2-C-A1 12 34.671 50.9 50.9 18.3 0.582 224 0.680C2-C-A1 15 33.809 50.8 50.6 18.5 0.928 361 0.663C2-C-A1 16 33.183 50.9 50.7 18.5 0.874 339 0.647C2-C-A1 17 31.757 50.9 50.8 18.4 0.756 293 0.622C2-C-A1 18 31.065 50.8 50.8 18.4 0.576 223 0.610C2-C-A2 3 34.363 50.9 50.9 18.2 0.937 362 0.679C2-C-A2 4 32.827 50.9 51.0 18.4 0.767 296 0.641C2-C-A2 5 33.206 50.9 50.9 18.4 0.857 331 0.651C2-C-A2 6 32.212 50.8 50.9 18.4 0.839 324 0.633C2-C-A2 9 34.428 50.9 50.8 18.2 0.856 331 0.683C2-C-A2 10 33.749 50.9 50.9 18.4 0.919 355 0.662C2-C-A2 11 33.535 50.9 50.8 18.5 0.898 347 0.653C2-C-A2 12 33.546 50.9 50.9 18.3 0.689 266 0.658C2-C-A2 15 32.508 50.9 50.9 18.4 0.901 348 0.636C2-C-A2 16 31.717 50.9 50.8 18.6 0.826 320 0.616C2-C-A2 17 34.141 50.8 50.9 18.5 1.113 430 0.666C2-C-A2 18 33.284 50.9 50.8 18.5 0.879 340 0.650C2-C-A3 3 34.792 50.9 50.8 18.3 0.755 292 0.683C2-C-A3 4 32.645 50.9 50.8 18.2 0.769 298 0.646C2-C-A3 5 33.824 50.9 50.9 18.2 0.883 341 0.667C2-C-A3 6 34.603 50.8 50.9 18.2 0.838 324 0.687C2-C-A3 9 34.719 50.9 50.9 18.4 0.595 230 0.677C2-C-A3 10 33.579 50.9 50.8 18.4 0.838 324 0.656C2-C-A3 11 34.772 50.9 50.9 18.5 0.770 298 0.678C2-C-A3 12 34.454 50.9 50.8 18.4 0.934 361 0.674

Page 275: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

275

Experiment 3 Data

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm3)

C2-C-A3 15 35.154 50.8 50.8 18.5 0.885 342 0.685C2-C-A3 16 35.062 50.9 50.8 18.6 1.008 390 0.680C2-C-A3 17 33.033 50.9 50.8 18.5 0.776 300 0.643C2-C-A3 18 33.123 50.9 50.8 18.6 0.748 289 0.642C2-C-A4 3 34.171 51.0 50.9 18.1 1.184 457 0.677C2-C-A4 4 33.715 50.9 51.0 18.2 1.035 399 0.665C2-C-A4 5 33.953 51.0 50.9 18.4 1.038 400 0.663C2-C-A4 6 35.042 51.0 51.0 18.1 0.994 383 0.693C2-C-A4 9 34.889 51.0 51.0 18.3 1.073 413 0.683C2-C-A4 10 31.596 50.9 51.0 18.4 0.709 273 0.616C2-C-A4 11 32.271 51.0 51.0 18.2 0.900 346 0.635C2-C-A4 12 33.151 50.9 51.0 18.5 0.879 339 0.645C2-C-A4 15 32.722 50.9 51.0 18.4 0.912 351 0.638C2-C-A4 16 33.164 51.0 51.0 18.3 0.732 282 0.649C2-C-A4 17 32.687 50.9 51.0 18.5 0.805 310 0.635C2-C-A4 18 31.422 50.9 51.0 18.4 0.585 226 0.614C2-C-A5 3 32.909 51.0 51.0 18.1 1.040 400 0.654C2-C-A5 4 31.930 51.0 51.0 18.1 1.015 391 0.633C2-C-A5 5 29.840 51.0 50.9 18.2 0.767 296 0.591C2-C-A5 6 29.943 50.9 51.0 18.3 0.504 194 0.588C2-C-A5 9 33.701 51.0 51.0 18.1 1.064 409 0.669C2-C-A5 10 33.158 51.0 51.1 18.1 0.919 353 0.658C2-C-A5 11 33.232 50.9 51.0 18.2 0.988 381 0.656C2-C-A5 12 31.884 50.9 51.0 18.1 0.729 281 0.636C2-C-A5 15 33.109 51.0 51.0 18.3 0.840 323 0.648C2-C-A5 16 33.467 51.0 51.0 18.2 0.851 327 0.659C2-C-A5 17 34.825 50.9 51.0 18.4 0.593 228 0.679C2-C-A5 18 31.919 50.9 50.9 18.3 0.546 211 0.630C2-C-A6 3 32.769 50.9 50.9 18.4 0.651 251 0.640C2-C-A6 4 33.625 50.9 51.0 18.3 0.661 255 0.661C2-C-A6 5 32.372 50.9 50.9 18.1 0.970 374 0.642C2-C-A6 6 32.472 50.9 51.0 18.2 0.773 298 0.640C2-C-A6 9 33.433 50.9 51.0 18.2 0.230 89 0.660C2-C-A6 10 31.826 50.9 51.0 18.2 0.705 272 0.628C2-C-A6 11 31.089 51.0 50.9 18.3 0.749 289 0.609C2-C-A6 12 32.842 50.9 51.0 18.4 0.815 314 0.640C2-C-A6 15 29.569 50.9 51.0 18.6 0.202 78 0.573C2-C-A6 16 31.917 51.0 51.0 18.6 0.355 137 0.614C2-C-A6 17 33.190 50.9 51.0 18.3 0.666 257 0.651C2-C-A6 18 31.885 51.0 50.9 18.2 0.509 196 0.629C2-C-A7 3 34.194 50.9 50.9 18.4 0.768 296 0.668C2-C-A7 4 32.987 50.9 50.9 18.5 1.082 418 0.640C2-C-A7 5 33.208 50.9 51.0 18.5 0.807 311 0.643C2-C-A7 6 32.459 50.9 51.0 18.6 0.902 348 0.628C2-C-A7 9 35.335 50.9 50.9 18.5 0.855 330 0.685C2-C-A7 10 33.454 50.9 50.9 18.6 0.734 283 0.646C2-C-A7 11 32.365 50.9 50.9 18.5 0.791 306 0.628C2-C-A7 12 31.560 50.9 50.9 18.5 0.867 335 0.615C2-C-A7 15 32.313 50.9 50.9 18.7 0.341 132 0.621C2-C-A7 16 34.986 50.9 50.9 18.7 0.766 296 0.670C2-C-A7 17 34.873 50.9 50.9 18.7 0.798 308 0.669

Page 276: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

276

Appendix E

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm3)

C2-C-A7 18 35.594 50.9 50.9 18.6 1.042 402 0.686C2-C-A8 3 34.285 50.9 50.9 18.4 1.087 420 0.673C2-C-A8 4 32.879 50.8 50.9 18.4 0.491 190 0.644C2-C-A8 5 35.035 50.9 50.9 18.4 0.922 356 0.687C2-C-A8 6 34.530 50.9 50.8 18.4 0.980 379 0.678C2-C-A8 9 33.752 50.9 50.9 18.3 0.726 280 0.665C2-C-A8 10 34.112 50.9 50.9 18.4 0.767 296 0.666C2-C-A8 11 34.051 50.9 51.0 18.4 0.920 354 0.664C2-C-A8 12 32.029 50.9 50.9 18.3 0.940 363 0.629C2-C-A8 15 31.309 50.9 50.9 18.4 0.753 291 0.611C2-C-A8 16 33.316 50.9 51.0 18.5 0.719 277 0.648C2-C-A8 17 35.529 50.9 50.9 18.5 0.922 356 0.689C2-C-A8 18 31.778 50.9 50.9 18.4 0.673 260 0.622C2-C-A9 3 32.841 50.9 50.8 18.4 0.949 367 0.643C2-C-A9 4 31.880 50.9 51.0 18.4 0.644 248 0.621C2-C-A9 5 34.336 50.9 51.0 18.5 1.024 395 0.666C2-C-A9 6 33.665 50.9 50.9 18.5 0.897 346 0.654C2-C-A9 9 33.868 51.0 50.9 18.5 0.751 289 0.657C2-C-A9 10 31.543 50.9 50.9 18.5 0.814 314 0.613C2-C-A9 11 33.555 50.9 50.9 18.5 0.960 371 0.653C2-C-A9 12 34.153 50.9 50.9 18.4 0.957 369 0.669C2-C-A9 15 31.786 50.9 50.8 18.6 0.689 267 0.617C2-C-A9 16 34.594 50.9 51.0 18.6 1.024 395 0.669C2-C-A9 17 34.359 50.9 50.9 18.6 0.798 308 0.662C2-C-A9 18 34.460 51.0 50.9 18.6 0.666 256 0.664C2-CTC-A1 3 33.979 51.0 50.9 18.1 1.118 431 0.674C2-CTC-A1 4 31.287 50.9 51.0 18.1 0.991 382 0.621C2-CTC-A1 5 32.260 50.9 51.1 18.1 1.237 476 0.641C2-CTC-A1 6 33.496 51.0 51.0 18.4 0.733 282 0.653C2-CTC-A1 9 33.115 51.0 50.9 18.3 0.875 338 0.650C2-CTC-A1 10 31.086 50.9 51.0 18.4 0.839 323 0.607C2-CTC-A1 11 33.392 50.9 50.9 18.3 1.110 429 0.657C2-CTC-A1 12 34.327 50.9 51.0 18.2 1.355 523 0.677C2-CTC-A1 15 32.921 51.0 50.9 18.2 0.676 261 0.650C2-CTC-A1 16 33.734 51.0 51.0 18.3 0.957 368 0.661C2-CTC-A1 17 33.242 50.9 50.9 18.2 0.917 354 0.656C2-CTC-A1 18 32.954 50.9 50.9 18.2 0.950 367 0.651C2-CTC-A2 3 30.613 50.8 50.9 17.7 0.731 283 0.623C2-CTC-A2 4 30.677 50.9 51.0 17.9 1.029 396 0.617C2-CTC-A2 5 34.193 50.9 51.0 18.2 1.265 487 0.676C2-CTC-A2 6 31.303 50.9 51.0 18.2 0.768 296 0.617C2-CTC-A2 9 31.934 51.0 51.0 18.1 0.942 362 0.632C2-CTC-A2 10 31.392 50.9 50.8 18.1 0.823 318 0.624C2-CTC-A2 11 32.170 50.9 51.0 18.0 0.475 183 0.642C2-CTC-A2 12 34.019 50.8 51.0 18.2 0.839 324 0.674C2-CTC-A2 15 33.195 51.0 50.9 18.2 0.667 257 0.658C2-CTC-A2 16 29.468 51.0 50.9 18.3 0.221 85 0.579C2-CTC-A2 17 35.576 50.9 51.0 18.6 0.490 189 0.689C2-CTC-A2 18 33.811 50.9 50.9 18.4 0.927 358 0.663C2-CTC-A3 3 32.065 51.0 50.9 17.8 0.992 383 0.649C2-CTC-A3 4 34.404 50.9 51.0 18.0 0.988 381 0.689

Page 277: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

277

Experiment 3 Data

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm3)

C2-CTC-A3 5 33.501 50.9 50.9 18.2 1.056 407 0.664C2-CTC-A3 6 33.351 51.0 51.0 18.1 0.700 269 0.661C2-CTC-A3 9 32.365 50.9 51.0 17.9 0.761 294 0.651C2-CTC-A3 10 35.952 51.0 50.9 18.3 1.089 420 0.705C2-CTC-A3 11 33.763 50.9 50.9 18.2 1.106 427 0.669C2-CTC-A3 12 33.595 51.0 50.9 18.4 0.645 249 0.655C2-CTC-A3 15 34.373 51.0 50.8 18.3 0.771 298 0.676C2-CTC-A3 16 35.327 51.1 50.9 18.3 0.739 285 0.693C2-CTC-A3 17 31.742 50.9 51.0 18.1 0.668 258 0.632C2-CTC-A3 18 32.826 50.9 50.9 18.2 0.775 299 0.650C2-CTC-A4 3 31.530 50.9 50.9 17.9 1.083 418 0.636C2-CTC-A4 4 33.748 50.9 50.8 17.9 0.890 344 0.680C2-CTC-A4 5 33.594 50.9 50.9 18.1 0.989 382 0.667C2-CTC-A4 6 35.423 50.9 50.9 18.0 1.201 464 0.708C2-CTC-A4 9 33.676 50.9 50.8 18.1 1.114 431 0.671C2-CTC-A4 10 32.223 50.9 50.9 18.0 0.773 299 0.644C2-CTC-A4 11 32.210 50.9 50.9 17.8 0.997 385 0.651C2-CTC-A4 12 33.137 50.9 50.9 17.8 0.747 289 0.671C2-CTC-A4 15 31.180 50.8 50.9 18.1 0.633 245 0.623C2-CTC-A4 16 33.908 50.9 50.9 18.1 0.904 349 0.674C2-CTC-A4 17 32.196 50.9 50.9 18.1 0.761 294 0.640C2-CTC-A4 18 31.972 50.9 50.9 18.2 0.492 190 0.634C2-CTC-A5 3 35.558 51.0 50.9 18.1 1.179 455 0.707C2-CTC-A5 4 36.193 51.0 50.9 18.3 0.837 323 0.711C2-CTC-A5 5 32.133 51.0 51.0 18.0 1.048 404 0.641C2-CTC-A5 6 32.562 50.9 51.0 18.1 0.981 378 0.645C2-CTC-A5 9 33.621 51.0 51.0 18.1 0.960 369 0.665C2-CTC-A5 10 33.643 50.9 51.0 18.2 1.086 419 0.664C2-CTC-A5 11 30.890 51.0 51.0 18.1 0.835 321 0.613C2-CTC-A5 12 34.797 50.9 51.0 18.2 0.906 349 0.687C2-CTC-A5 15 32.175 51.0 50.9 18.2 0.594 229 0.636C2-CTC-A5 16 33.035 50.9 51.0 18.1 0.839 323 0.657C2-CTC-A5 17 32.286 50.9 51.0 18.2 0.688 265 0.639C2-CTC-A5 18 33.914 51.0 51.0 18.3 0.640 246 0.664C2-CTC-A6 3 32.900 51.0 50.9 18.2 0.830 320 0.652C2-CTC-A6 4 32.686 51.0 50.9 18.2 0.951 367 0.647C2-CTC-A6 5 33.060 51.0 50.9 18.2 1.128 435 0.654C2-CTC-A6 6 32.819 50.9 51.0 18.1 0.759 292 0.652C2-CTC-A6 9 31.886 51.0 50.9 18.2 0.684 263 0.632C2-CTC-A6 10 32.521 51.0 51.0 18.1 0.830 319 0.644C2-CTC-A6 11 35.068 51.0 51.0 18.2 0.644 248 0.693C2-CTC-A6 12 33.407 51.0 50.9 18.1 0.611 235 0.664C2-CTC-A6 15 31.986 51.0 51.0 18.3 0.709 273 0.630C2-CTC-A6 16 31.583 51.0 50.9 18.4 0.730 281 0.616C2-CTC-A6 17 30.016 50.9 50.9 18.4 0.563 217 0.588C2-CTC-A6 18 31.141 51.0 51.0 18.3 0.384 148 0.612C2-CTC-A7 3 34.649 50.9 50.8 18.2 1.027 397 0.684C2-CTC-A7 4 32.153 50.9 50.9 18.2 0.948 366 0.636C2-CTC-A7 5 32.799 50.8 50.8 18.3 0.963 373 0.648C2-CTC-A7 6 33.138 50.9 50.9 18.3 0.489 189 0.651C2-CTC-A7 9 33.460 50.8 50.8 18.3 1.139 441 0.661

Page 278: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

278

Appendix E

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm3)

C2-CTC-A7 10 33.343 50.9 50.8 18.3 0.985 382 0.656C2-CTC-A7 11 34.756 50.9 50.8 18.4 0.900 348 0.680C2-CTC-A7 12 33.938 50.8 50.8 18.4 0.759 294 0.666C2-CTC-A7 15 34.055 50.8 50.8 18.3 0.976 378 0.670C2-CTC-A7 16 35.504 50.8 50.8 18.5 0.806 312 0.694C2-CTC-A7 17 31.845 50.9 50.7 18.4 0.702 272 0.624C2-CTC-A7 18 31.541 50.9 50.7 18.4 0.546 211 0.620C2-CTC-A8 3 32.215 51.0 50.8 18.3 0.763 295 0.634C2-CTC-A8 4 32.616 50.8 50.8 18.3 0.755 293 0.645C2-CTC-A8 5 34.056 50.9 50.9 18.3 0.748 289 0.670C2-CTC-A8 6 35.873 50.8 50.8 18.3 1.112 431 0.707C2-CTC-A8 9 32.108 50.8 50.8 18.3 0.726 281 0.634C2-CTC-A8 10 30.903 50.8 50.9 18.3 0.876 338 0.608C2-CTC-A8 11 33.264 50.8 50.8 18.4 0.915 355 0.653C2-CTC-A8 12 34.661 50.9 50.8 18.4 0.857 332 0.679C2-CTC-A8 15 32.081 50.8 50.9 18.5 0.686 265 0.626C2-CTC-A8 16 34.783 50.9 50.9 18.5 0.724 280 0.678C2-CTC-A8 17 31.371 50.8 50.8 18.3 0.681 264 0.619C2-CTC-A8 18 33.768 50.8 50.8 18.4 0.873 338 0.661C2-CTC-A9 3 32.619 50.9 51.0 18.4 0.847 326 0.637C2-CTC-A9 4 31.424 50.8 50.9 18.4 0.817 316 0.617C2-CTC-A9 5 32.924 50.9 50.8 18.4 0.880 341 0.646C2-CTC-A9 6 35.185 50.9 50.8 18.4 1.139 441 0.689C2-CTC-A9 9 33.768 50.8 50.9 18.4 0.656 254 0.662C2-CTC-A9 10 33.944 50.9 50.9 18.5 0.947 366 0.661C2-CTC-A9 11 33.124 50.9 51.0 18.5 0.956 368 0.644C2-CTC-A9 12 34.026 50.9 51.0 18.4 0.530 204 0.663C2-CTC-A9 15 33.087 50.8 50.9 18.5 0.660 255 0.644C2-CTC-A9 16 33.802 50.9 50.9 18.5 0.853 330 0.658C2-CTC-A9 17 33.370 50.9 50.9 18.5 0.797 308 0.648C2-CTC-A9 18 33.026 50.9 51.0 18.4 0.840 324 0.645C2-L-A1 3 34.244 50.9 50.9 18.2 0.867 335 0.678C2-L-A1 4 36.888 50.9 50.8 18.4 1.209 468 0.726C2-L-A1 5 34.302 50.9 50.9 18.3 1.110 429 0.675C2-L-A1 6 31.710 50.8 50.9 18.3 0.832 322 0.627C2-L-A1 9 33.797 50.9 50.9 18.2 0.852 330 0.670C2-L-A1 10 33.741 50.8 50.9 18.2 0.708 274 0.669C2-L-A1 11 33.741 50.8 50.9 18.4 1.046 404 0.662C2-L-A1 12 33.690 50.9 50.8 18.5 1.116 432 0.658C2-L-A1 15 33.319 50.9 50.9 18.5 0.722 279 0.651C2-L-A1 16 32.120 50.9 50.9 18.5 0.684 264 0.625C2-L-A1 17 31.285 50.9 50.8 18.3 0.871 337 0.617C2-L-A1 18 33.414 50.9 50.9 18.5 0.967 374 0.651C2-L-A2 3 32.234 50.9 50.9 18.2 0.667 258 0.639C2-L-A2 4 32.001 50.9 50.8 18.2 0.987 382 0.634C2-L-A2 5 32.020 50.9 50.8 18.3 0.880 341 0.632C2-L-A2 6 33.968 50.8 50.9 18.3 1.145 442 0.671C2-L-A2 9 34.739 50.9 50.9 18.3 1.090 421 0.686C2-L-A2 10 32.888 50.9 50.9 18.3 0.855 330 0.647C2-L-A2 11 32.033 50.9 50.9 18.3 0.896 346 0.632C2-L-A2 12 33.395 50.9 50.8 18.3 1.381 534 0.660

Page 279: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

279

Experiment 3 Data

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm3)

C2-L-A2 15 32.935 50.9 50.8 18.4 0.770 298 0.646C2-L-A2 16 35.977 50.9 50.8 18.5 1.006 389 0.703C2-L-A2 17 32.061 50.8 50.9 18.4 0.758 293 0.629C2-L-A2 18 33.901 50.9 50.9 18.5 0.846 327 0.662C2-L-A3 3 32.618 50.8 50.8 18.4 0.468 181 0.639C2-L-A3 4 33.844 50.9 50.8 18.3 0.884 342 0.666C2-L-A3 5 34.352 50.9 50.9 18.5 0.926 358 0.670C2-L-A3 6 35.189 50.9 50.8 18.5 0.822 318 0.686C2-L-A3 9 32.064 50.8 50.9 18.4 0.620 240 0.628C2-L-A3 10 32.908 50.9 50.8 18.5 0.860 333 0.642C2-L-A3 11 32.017 50.9 50.7 18.4 0.771 299 0.630C2-L-A3 12 33.346 50.9 50.8 18.4 0.905 350 0.654C2-L-A3 15 32.517 50.9 50.9 18.5 0.540 208 0.634C2-L-A3 16 33.189 50.9 50.9 18.5 0.800 309 0.645C2-L-A3 17 31.107 50.9 50.9 18.3 0.646 250 0.612C2-L-A3 18 34.819 50.9 50.9 18.5 0.872 337 0.678C2-L-A4 3 33.874 50.9 50.9 18.2 1.038 400 0.671C2-L-A4 4 33.525 51.1 50.9 18.1 1.050 404 0.666C2-L-A4 5 31.629 51.0 50.9 18.0 0.987 380 0.631C2-L-A4 6 32.746 51.0 50.9 18.0 0.981 378 0.653C2-L-A4 9 31.739 51.1 50.9 17.9 0.931 358 0.636C2-L-A4 10 32.710 51.0 50.9 18.0 1.042 402 0.652C2-L-A4 11 32.521 50.9 50.8 18.2 1.059 410 0.646C2-L-A4 12 34.335 51.0 51.0 18.2 1.022 393 0.676C2-L-A4 15 34.646 51.0 50.9 18.3 0.696 268 0.680C2-L-A4 16 33.386 51.1 50.7 18.4 0.776 299 0.653C2-L-A4 17 33.173 51.0 50.9 18.4 0.553 213 0.649C2-L-A4 18 35.381 51.0 50.9 18.5 0.452 174 0.687C2-L-A5 3 34.248 51.0 50.9 17.9 1.336 515 0.687C2-L-A5 4 33.857 51.0 50.9 18.3 0.957 369 0.666C2-L-A5 5 33.825 51.0 50.9 18.1 1.156 446 0.671C2-L-A5 6 33.531 51.0 51.0 18.1 0.830 319 0.663C2-L-A5 9 32.395 50.9 50.9 18.0 0.793 306 0.649C2-L-A5 10 34.755 51.0 51.0 18.2 1.308 503 0.685C2-L-A5 11 34.242 51.0 51.0 18.2 1.069 411 0.674C2-L-A5 12 33.086 51.0 51.0 18.2 1.054 405 0.654C2-L-A5 15 34.331 50.9 50.9 18.3 0.881 340 0.675C2-L-A5 16 33.087 51.0 50.8 18.2 0.871 336 0.656C2-L-A5 17 34.859 51.0 50.9 18.3 0.821 316 0.684C2-L-A5 18 32.151 50.9 50.8 18.3 0.417 161 0.633C2-L-A6 3 32.517 51.0 50.9 18.0 1.050 404 0.649C2-L-A6 4 31.781 51.0 50.8 18.1 0.805 311 0.630C2-L-A6 5 33.917 51.0 50.8 18.3 1.077 416 0.666C2-L-A6 6 31.796 50.9 50.9 18.1 0.568 219 0.632C2-L-A6 9 36.735 51.0 50.9 18.1 1.250 482 0.728C2-L-A6 10 35.846 50.9 51.0 18.2 0.869 335 0.705C2-L-A6 11 34.354 51.0 50.9 18.3 0.889 342 0.673C2-L-A6 12 31.193 50.9 50.9 18.3 0.653 252 0.614C2-L-A6 15 34.289 51.0 51.0 18.2 1.033 398 0.675C2-L-A6 16 34.974 51.0 50.8 18.3 1.179 455 0.689C2-L-A6 17 34.260 50.9 50.9 18.4 1.087 420 0.669

Page 280: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

280

Appendix E

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm3)

C2-L-A6 18 32.993 51.0 51.0 18.4 0.540 208 0.643C2-L-A7 3 33.607 50.9 50.9 18.1 0.673 260 0.666C2-L-A7 4 33.694 50.9 50.9 18.2 1.117 431 0.663C2-L-A7 5 33.458 50.9 50.9 18.3 0.815 315 0.657C2-L-A7 6 33.114 51.0 50.9 18.3 0.788 304 0.649C2-L-A7 9 34.198 51.0 50.9 18.1 0.891 344 0.679C2-L-A7 10 32.581 51.0 50.9 18.0 1.072 414 0.650C2-L-A7 11 32.021 51.0 50.9 18.2 0.387 149 0.630C2-L-A7 12 33.378 50.9 50.9 18.1 0.779 301 0.663C2-L-A7 15 33.494 50.9 50.8 18.1 0.381 148 0.665C2-L-A7 16 34.287 50.9 50.7 18.1 0.821 318 0.682C2-L-A7 17 34.594 50.9 50.8 18.3 0.909 351 0.681C2-L-A7 18 33.005 50.9 50.8 17.9 1.057 409 0.662C2-L-A8 3 32.031 50.8 50.8 17.9 0.951 368 0.646C2-L-A8 4 34.351 50.8 50.8 18.0 0.850 329 0.688C2-L-A8 5 32.922 50.8 50.8 17.7 0.883 342 0.671C2-L-A8 6 32.479 50.8 50.9 17.8 0.951 368 0.658C2-L-A8 9 31.679 50.8 50.8 17.4 0.554 215 0.656C2-L-A8 10 33.134 50.8 50.8 17.6 1.051 408 0.678C2-L-A8 11 33.119 50.8 50.7 18.0 0.863 335 0.663C2-L-A8 12 31.674 50.8 50.8 17.9 0.676 262 0.637C2-L-A8 15 31.856 50.8 50.9 18.2 0.389 151 0.632C2-L-A8 16 31.388 50.8 50.7 18.1 0.649 252 0.625C2-L-A8 17 31.441 50.8 50.9 18.0 0.492 190 0.629C2-L-A8 18 29.007 50.8 50.8 17.8 0.397 154 0.589C2-L-A9 3 32.073 50.8 50.7 17.8 0.864 335 0.649C2-L-A9 4 31.924 50.8 50.9 17.9 0.783 303 0.642C2-L-A9 5 33.537 50.8 50.8 18.1 0.927 359 0.668C2-L-A9 6 32.233 50.8 50.8 18.1 0.610 237 0.644C2-L-A9 9 33.621 50.8 50.8 18.0 0.991 384 0.673C2-L-A9 10 32.663 50.8 50.8 18.2 0.968 375 0.647C2-L-A9 11 32.543 50.8 50.7 17.9 0.918 357 0.655C2-L-A9 12 30.243 50.8 50.8 18.0 0.592 230 0.605C2-L-A9 15 33.514 50.8 50.7 18.1 0.559 217 0.669C2-L-A9 16 31.158 50.9 50.8 18.1 0.374 145 0.622C2-L-A9 17 33.894 50.8 50.8 18.0 0.723 280 0.678C2-L-A9 18 32.034 50.8 50.7 18.3 0.802 311 0.631C2-S-A1 3 35.113 50.8 50.8 18.1 0.736 285 0.701C2-S-A1 4 35.073 50.9 50.9 18.2 0.709 274 0.697C2-S-A1 5 31.388 50.8 50.8 18.2 0.621 240 0.624C2-S-A1 6 29.400 50.9 50.9 18.3 0.429 166 0.580C2-S-A1 9 34.011 50.9 50.9 18.1 0.984 380 0.677C2-S-A1 10 36.609 50.9 50.8 18.4 0.944 366 0.719C2-S-A1 11 34.705 50.9 50.9 18.4 0.679 262 0.681C2-S-A1 12 32.839 50.8 50.8 18.3 0.620 240 0.649C2-S-A1 15 34.974 50.8 50.9 18.3 0.685 265 0.690C2-S-A1 16 33.957 50.9 50.9 18.4 0.587 227 0.665C2-S-A1 17 31.618 50.9 50.9 18.4 0.525 203 0.621C2-S-A1 18 32.748 50.8 50.9 18.4 0.466 180 0.645C2-S-A2 3 30.542 50.9 50.9 18.0 0.745 288 0.611C2-S-A2 4 31.763 50.9 50.8 18.1 0.795 307 0.634

Page 281: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

281

Experiment 3 Data

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm3)

C2-S-A2 5 30.887 50.9 50.9 17.9 0.584 226 0.624C2-S-A2 6 33.116 50.8 50.8 18.1 0.646 250 0.660C2-S-A2 9 32.502 50.9 50.8 18.1 0.792 306 0.650C2-S-A2 10 34.174 50.9 50.9 18.2 0.811 313 0.679C2-S-A2 11 33.036 50.8 50.8 18.0 0.835 323 0.663C2-S-A2 12 32.842 50.9 50.9 18.2 0.661 255 0.652C2-S-A2 15 31.533 50.9 50.9 18.2 0.288 111 0.626C2-S-A2 16 32.220 50.9 50.8 18.3 0.688 266 0.637C2-S-A2 17 33.185 50.9 50.9 18.4 0.556 215 0.652C2-S-A2 18 31.173 50.9 50.9 18.2 0.328 127 0.620C2-S-A3 3 31.811 50.9 50.8 18.2 0.533 206 0.630C2-S-A3 4 33.392 50.9 50.8 18.3 0.831 322 0.658C2-S-A3 5 33.473 50.9 50.9 18.3 0.803 310 0.658C2-S-A3 6 33.793 50.9 50.8 18.2 0.594 230 0.669C2-S-A3 9 33.908 50.9 50.8 18.2 0.671 259 0.674C2-S-A3 10 31.904 50.9 50.8 18.1 0.553 214 0.635C2-S-A3 11 32.834 50.9 50.8 18.4 0.705 273 0.646C2-S-A3 12 35.132 50.9 50.8 18.6 0.718 278 0.683C2-S-A3 15 33.024 50.8 50.8 18.3 0.742 288 0.654C2-S-A3 16 33.458 50.9 50.8 18.5 0.774 299 0.651C2-S-A3 17 32.855 50.9 50.9 18.3 0.485 187 0.646C2-S-A3 18 34.401 50.9 50.9 18.7 0.417 161 0.662C2-S-A4 3 33.790 50.9 50.8 18.1 0.875 339 0.674C2-S-A4 4 34.548 50.9 50.7 18.4 0.777 301 0.679C2-S-A4 5 35.218 50.9 50.8 18.1 0.894 346 0.700C2-S-A4 6 35.116 51.0 51.0 17.9 0.882 339 0.703C2-S-A4 9 32.589 50.9 50.7 17.9 0.836 323 0.658C2-S-A4 10 33.258 50.9 51.1 17.9 0.827 318 0.667C2-S-A4 11 33.424 51.0 50.9 18.2 0.876 338 0.660C2-S-A4 12 32.975 51.0 50.7 18.0 0.650 251 0.661C2-S-A4 15 33.729 50.9 51.0 18.4 0.350 135 0.661C2-S-A4 16 32.806 50.9 50.7 18.1 0.464 180 0.655C2-S-A4 17 34.052 51.0 50.9 18.4 0.633 244 0.666C2-S-A4 18 34.041 50.9 50.9 18.4 0.625 241 0.665C2-S-A5 3 35.267 50.9 50.9 17.8 1.045 403 0.714C2-S-A5 4 31.021 51.0 50.8 18.1 0.662 256 0.619C2-S-A5 5 33.588 50.9 50.9 17.9 0.623 240 0.678C2-S-A5 6 30.604 51.0 50.9 17.9 0.734 283 0.617C2-S-A5 9 29.993 51.0 50.9 17.9 0.820 316 0.604C2-S-A5 10 32.129 51.0 51.0 18.0 0.571 220 0.641C2-S-A5 11 29.513 50.9 50.9 17.9 0.525 203 0.595C2-S-A5 12 31.930 51.0 50.9 18.0 0.813 313 0.639C2-S-A5 15 34.051 51.1 50.8 18.2 0.916 353 0.674C2-S-A5 16 33.096 50.8 50.9 18.4 0.875 338 0.651C2-S-A5 17 31.941 51.0 50.9 18.3 0.859 331 0.630C2-S-A5 18 32.101 50.9 50.9 18.3 0.564 218 0.634C2-S-A6 3 32.000 51.0 51.1 18.2 0.402 154 0.631C2-S-A6 4 33.122 51.0 50.9 18.1 0.908 350 0.659C2-S-A6 5 32.972 51.0 51.0 18.1 0.903 348 0.656C2-S-A6 6 34.513 51.0 51.0 18.1 1.069 411 0.685C2-S-A6 9 32.762 51.0 50.9 18.1 0.277 107 0.653

Page 282: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

282

Appendix E

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm3)

C2-S-A6 10 33.622 51.0 51.0 18.4 0.720 277 0.657C2-S-A6 11 34.511 51.1 50.9 18.4 0.816 314 0.675C2-S-A6 12 32.983 50.9 50.9 18.1 0.786 303 0.656C2-S-A6 15 31.755 50.9 50.9 18.2 0.328 127 0.627C2-S-A6 16 31.579 51.0 50.8 18.4 0.235 91 0.619C2-S-A6 17 34.492 51.1 50.9 18.4 0.613 236 0.673C2-S-A6 18 31.314 50.9 50.9 18.3 0.417 161 0.615C2-S-A7 3 32.345 50.8 50.8 18.3 0.783 303 0.637C2-S-A7 4 31.889 50.8 50.9 18.3 0.942 364 0.627C2-S-A7 5 32.944 50.8 50.9 18.4 0.516 199 0.646C2-S-A7 6 32.355 50.8 50.9 18.3 0.728 282 0.637C2-S-A7 9 33.091 50.9 50.8 18.4 0.721 279 0.648C2-S-A7 10 34.556 50.8 50.9 18.4 0.559 216 0.677C2-S-A7 11 33.024 50.8 50.8 18.4 0.720 279 0.648C2-S-A7 12 34.262 50.8 50.9 18.4 0.827 320 0.671C2-S-A7 15 31.420 50.9 50.8 18.6 0.204 79 0.609C2-S-A7 16 31.820 50.7 50.8 18.7 0.202 78 0.613C2-S-A7 17 32.986 50.8 51.0 18.6 0.439 169 0.636C2-S-A7 18 35.724 50.8 50.8 18.5 0.744 288 0.695C2-S-A8 3 34.024 50.8 50.8 18.2 1.158 448 0.673C2-S-A8 4 31.052 50.9 50.9 18.2 0.518 200 0.613C2-S-A8 5 33.327 50.9 50.9 18.3 0.927 358 0.655C2-S-A8 6 33.606 50.8 50.8 18.2 0.890 345 0.666C2-S-A8 9 32.805 50.8 50.8 18.2 0.965 374 0.651C2-S-A8 10 30.903 50.9 50.8 18.2 0.637 247 0.611C2-S-A8 11 32.225 50.8 50.9 18.2 0.836 324 0.638C2-S-A8 12 30.270 50.8 50.9 18.3 0.647 250 0.598C2-S-A8 15 31.266 50.9 50.7 18.3 0.329 127 0.618C2-S-A8 16 31.921 50.8 50.7 18.4 0.749 290 0.627C2-S-A8 17 32.204 50.9 50.8 18.3 0.853 330 0.634C2-S-A8 18 31.752 50.8 50.7 18.3 1.032 400 0.627C2-S-A9 3 32.477 50.9 50.9 18.2 0.489 189 0.640C2-S-A9 4 33.649 50.9 50.9 18.3 0.685 264 0.660C2-S-A9 5 34.798 50.8 50.9 18.4 0.870 337 0.682C2-S-A9 6 34.350 50.9 50.9 18.3 0.784 303 0.676C2-S-A9 9 31.066 50.9 50.8 18.3 0.459 177 0.610C2-S-A9 10 31.581 50.9 50.8 18.3 0.489 189 0.621C2-S-A9 11 34.285 50.8 50.9 18.3 0.816 316 0.673C2-S-A9 12 33.164 50.8 50.9 18.3 0.693 268 0.652C2-S-A9 15 33.490 50.9 50.8 18.4 0.308 119 0.654C2-S-A9 16 33.518 50.8 50.8 18.6 0.473 183 0.649C2-S-A9 17 33.842 50.8 50.8 18.4 0.670 260 0.664C2-S-A9 18 31.545 50.9 50.9 18.3 0.334 129 0.618C2-TC-A1 3 32.781 50.9 50.8 17.9 0.727 282 0.661C2-TC-A1 4 31.153 50.8 50.8 18.2 0.725 281 0.621C2-TC-A1 5 31.645 50.8 50.9 18.1 0.866 335 0.631C2-TC-A1 6 32.022 50.9 50.9 18.0 0.736 284 0.643C2-TC-A1 9 32.314 50.8 50.8 18.0 0.639 248 0.650C2-TC-A1 10 32.235 50.9 50.8 18.0 0.952 369 0.647C2-TC-A1 11 32.025 50.8 50.9 18.1 0.751 290 0.638C2-TC-A1 12 34.568 50.9 50.8 18.2 0.874 338 0.685

Page 283: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

283

Experiment 3 Data

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm3)

C2-TC-A1 15 33.566 50.9 50.8 18.3 0.870 337 0.664C2-TC-A1 16 32.303 50.8 50.8 18.1 0.635 246 0.645C2-TC-A1 17 31.871 50.9 50.8 18.2 0.624 242 0.633C2-TC-A1 18 32.096 50.8 50.9 18.5 0.283 110 0.628C2-TC-A2 3 34.308 50.8 50.9 18.1 0.888 343 0.684C2-TC-A2 4 35.310 50.8 50.9 18.2 1.048 405 0.700C2-TC-A2 5 34.412 50.9 50.9 18.2 1.169 451 0.680C2-TC-A2 6 33.907 50.9 50.9 18.2 0.924 357 0.674C2-TC-A2 9 33.031 50.9 50.9 18.2 0.776 300 0.655C2-TC-A2 10 33.723 50.9 50.9 18.3 0.974 377 0.665C2-TC-A2 11 32.259 50.9 50.9 18.2 1.062 410 0.638C2-TC-A2 12 33.725 50.9 50.8 18.2 0.666 258 0.668C2-TC-A2 15 35.038 50.9 50.8 18.3 0.864 334 0.692C2-TC-A2 16 34.906 50.8 50.8 18.4 0.779 301 0.687C2-TC-A2 17 35.925 50.9 50.8 18.4 0.993 384 0.707C2-TC-A2 18 34.527 50.9 50.8 18.3 0.690 267 0.682C2-TC-A3 3 32.690 50.8 50.8 18.1 0.797 309 0.652C2-TC-A3 4 33.835 50.9 50.9 18.5 0.664 257 0.660C2-TC-A3 5 31.429 50.9 50.9 18.4 0.853 329 0.615C2-TC-A3 6 32.068 50.9 50.9 18.4 0.501 194 0.627C2-TC-A3 9 31.708 50.9 50.9 18.3 0.765 295 0.624C2-TC-A3 10 32.994 50.9 50.9 18.4 0.592 229 0.647C2-TC-A3 11 31.555 50.9 51.0 18.2 0.433 167 0.623C2-TC-A3 12 33.250 50.9 50.9 18.3 0.894 346 0.656C2-TC-A3 15 34.067 50.9 50.9 18.3 0.515 199 0.672C2-TC-A3 16 32.441 50.9 50.9 18.4 0.588 227 0.635C2-TC-A3 17 31.533 50.9 50.8 18.3 0.655 253 0.620C2-TC-A3 18 32.767 50.9 50.8 18.3 0.423 164 0.645C2-TC-A4 3 31.781 51.0 50.8 18.0 0.710 274 0.635C2-TC-A4 4 32.000 51.0 50.6 18.1 0.838 325 0.638C2-TC-A4 5 32.364 50.9 50.8 18.2 0.610 236 0.643C2-TC-A4 6 32.499 51.0 50.5 18.1 0.817 317 0.652C2-TC-A4 9 30.167 51.0 50.7 18.1 0.588 227 0.600C2-TC-A4 10 32.778 51.0 50.5 18.2 0.674 262 0.652C2-TC-A4 11 34.255 50.8 50.4 18.2 0.942 368 0.685C2-TC-A4 12 35.178 50.9 50.8 18.3 1.087 420 0.694C2-TC-A4 15 33.947 51.0 50.7 18.4 0.511 198 0.666C2-TC-A4 16 32.767 51.0 50.8 18.4 0.651 251 0.640C2-TC-A4 17 35.341 50.9 50.7 18.4 0.838 325 0.695C2-TC-A4 18 32.376 51.0 50.5 18.4 0.338 131 0.636C2-TC-A5 3 33.532 51.0 50.9 18.1 0.764 295 0.668C2-TC-A5 4 32.880 51.0 50.9 18.3 0.809 312 0.649C2-TC-A5 5 33.497 51.0 51.0 18.0 0.864 332 0.667C2-TC-A5 6 33.752 51.1 50.8 18.2 0.866 334 0.668C2-TC-A5 9 31.789 51.0 50.7 18.1 0.538 208 0.634C2-TC-A5 10 34.806 50.9 50.9 18.2 0.640 248 0.690C2-TC-A5 11 31.499 51.1 50.9 18.2 0.516 199 0.624C2-TC-A5 12 31.360 51.0 50.9 18.1 0.620 239 0.622C2-TC-A5 15 32.100 51.0 50.9 18.4 0.358 138 0.627C2-TC-A5 16 32.625 50.9 50.9 18.5 0.324 125 0.636C2-TC-A5 17 32.146 51.0 50.8 18.3 0.502 194 0.633

Page 284: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

284

Appendix E

Board Sample Weight Width Length Thickness Peak Load IB Dry DensityName Number (g) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kPa) (g/cm3)

C2-TC-A5 18 32.803 51.0 50.9 18.3 0.516 199 0.644C2-TC-A6 3 32.739 50.9 50.9 18.2 0.599 231 0.649C2-TC-A6 4 33.630 50.9 50.8 18.1 1.003 388 0.672C2-TC-A6 5 34.165 51.0 50.9 18.1 1.157 445 0.677C2-TC-A6 6 33.197 51.0 51.0 18.1 0.955 368 0.661C2-TC-A6 9 33.740 51.0 51.0 18.3 0.600 231 0.664C2-TC-A6 10 32.934 51.0 51.0 18.3 0.734 283 0.647C2-TC-A6 11 34.192 51.0 50.9 18.2 0.910 351 0.676C2-TC-A6 12 32.092 50.9 51.0 18.0 0.609 235 0.643C2-TC-A6 15 31.856 50.9 50.8 18.4 0.539 208 0.624C2-TC-A6 16 33.700 51.0 51.0 18.4 0.685 263 0.656C2-TC-A6 17 33.603 50.9 50.8 18.4 0.513 199 0.661C2-TC-A6 18 29.555 51.0 50.7 18.3 0.358 138 0.584C2-TC-A7 3 33.770 50.9 50.8 18.3 1.025 397 0.663C2-TC-A7 4 34.002 50.9 50.9 18.4 1.137 440 0.666C2-TC-A7 5 33.016 50.9 50.9 18.4 0.982 380 0.645C2-TC-A7 6 33.470 50.9 50.9 18.4 0.719 278 0.655C2-TC-A7 9 33.806 50.8 50.8 18.4 0.782 303 0.661C2-TC-A7 10 33.406 50.8 50.8 18.4 0.804 311 0.654C2-TC-A7 11 35.026 50.8 50.9 18.5 1.102 426 0.682C2-TC-A7 12 33.483 50.8 50.9 18.3 0.814 315 0.657C2-TC-A7 15 34.186 50.8 50.8 18.3 0.646 250 0.672C2-TC-A7 16 30.486 50.8 50.9 18.5 0.545 211 0.593C2-TC-A7 17 34.722 50.8 50.9 18.6 0.739 286 0.673C2-TC-A7 18 33.688 50.8 50.8 18.6 0.664 257 0.654C2-TC-A8 3 32.036 50.9 50.9 18.3 0.305 118 0.631C2-TC-A8 4 32.325 50.9 50.9 18.2 0.819 316 0.638C2-TC-A8 5 34.702 50.9 50.9 18.3 1.040 402 0.685C2-TC-A8 6 34.249 50.9 50.9 18.3 1.109 428 0.675C2-TC-A8 9 33.176 50.9 50.8 18.1 0.825 319 0.661C2-TC-A8 10 33.709 50.9 50.8 18.1 0.935 362 0.670C2-TC-A8 11 34.035 50.9 50.9 18.1 0.679 262 0.678C2-TC-A8 12 33.291 50.8 50.9 17.9 0.876 339 0.669C2-TC-A8 15 34.265 50.9 50.9 18.3 0.829 320 0.676C2-TC-A8 16 33.198 50.9 50.8 18.1 0.540 209 0.660C2-TC-A8 17 32.802 50.9 50.8 18.3 0.626 242 0.648C2-TC-A8 18 32.629 50.8 50.8 18.3 0.510 197 0.642C2-TC-A9 3 35.161 50.9 50.7 18.4 1.027 398 0.691C2-TC-A9 4 35.254 50.9 50.8 18.3 1.159 449 0.695C2-TC-A9 5 33.438 50.9 50.8 18.5 0.929 359 0.651C2-TC-A9 6 35.157 50.9 50.8 18.3 0.511 197 0.692C2-TC-A9 9 33.246 50.9 50.8 18.4 0.699 270 0.652C2-TC-A9 10 32.841 50.9 50.8 18.4 0.719 278 0.642C2-TC-A9 11 33.621 50.8 50.9 18.5 0.990 383 0.656C2-TC-A9 12 35.452 50.8 50.9 18.4 1.206 466 0.693C2-TC-A9 15 31.521 50.9 50.9 18.4 0.588 227 0.616C2-TC-A9 16 33.153 50.9 50.9 18.5 0.933 361 0.646C2-TC-A9 17 30.987 50.9 50.7 18.4 0.671 260 0.608C2-TC-A9 18 35.678 50.8 50.7 18.5 1.081 419 0.699

Page 285: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

285

Experiment 3 Data

Table E-2. Experiment 3 individual moisture test results.

Board Wet Weight Dry Weight Moisture ContentName (g) (g) (%)

C2-BN-A1 34.315 32.184 6.6C2-BN-A2 33.527 31.437 6.6C2-BN-A3 34.370 32.221 6.7C2-BN-A4 35.549 33.355 6.6C2-BN-A5 35.508 33.309 6.6C2-BN-A6 32.327 30.190 7.1C2-BN-A7 34.036 30.849 10.3C2-BN-A8 35.219 32.949 6.9C2-BN-A9 33.473 32.312 3.6C2-C-A1 33.781 31.651 6.7C2-C-A2 35.013 32.810 6.7C2-C-A3 32.904 30.789 6.9C2-C-A4 32.214 30.148 6.9C2-C-A5 34.655 32.501 6.6C2-C-A6 30.751 28.800 6.8C2-C-A7 34.304 32.088 6.9C2-C-A8 35.422 33.175 6.8C2-C-A9 34.397 32.175 6.9C2-CTC-A1 33.052 30.963 6.7C2-CTC-A2 34.097 31.949 6.7C2-CTC-A3 32.376 30.349 6.7C2-CTC-A4 35.094 32.891 6.7C2-CTC-A5 32.120 30.111 6.7C2-CTC-A6 34.441 32.300 6.6C2-CTC-A7 34.897 32.648 6.9C2-CTC-A8 34.556 32.350 6.8C2-CTC-A9 33.456 31.317 6.8C2-L-A1 33.686 31.588 6.6C2-L-A2 33.859 31.742 6.7C2-L-A3 32.659 30.599 6.7C2-L-A4 34.917 32.722 6.7C2-L-A5 34.445 32.276 6.7C2-L-A6 33.096 30.968 6.9C2-L-A7 32.975 30.817 7.0C2-L-A8 32.717 30.579 7.0C2-L-A9 33.039 30.885 7.0C2-S-A1 36.839 34.558 6.6C2-S-A2 34.149 32.015 6.7C2-S-A3 34.296 32.147 6.7C2-S-A4 32.522 30.482 6.7C2-S-A5 36.836 34.587 6.5C2-S-A6 34.326 32.197 6.6C2-S-A7 33.075 30.930 6.9C2-S-A8 36.085 33.767 6.9C2-S-A9 34.497 32.242 7.0C2-TC-A1 34.737 32.586 6.6C2-TC-A2 34.855 32.679 6.7

Page 286: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

286

Appendix E

Board Wet Weight Dry Weight Moisture ContentName (g) (g) (%)

C2-TC-A3 32.286 30.220 6.8C2-TC-A4 35.188 32.973 6.7C2-TC-A5 35.410 33.220 6.6C2-TC-A6 33.833 31.733 6.6C2-TC-A7 30.666 28.682 6.9C2-TC-A8 33.605 31.468 6.8C2-TC-A9 34.965 32.746 6.8

Page 287: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

287

Temperature Profile Data

Appendix F. Temperature Profile Data

Appendix F contains the core temperature profile data measured during board

pressing. This data includes two boards each of: control, 1 wt. % TC, and 0.5 wt. % TC.

Table F-1. Control core temperature data.

Board 1 Thermocouples Board 2 ThermocouplesTime 1 2 3 1 2 3 Average

0 22 21 21 21 21 21 20.910 22 21 22 23 21 22 21.720 22 22 22 23 21 22 22.130 22 23 22 23 22 22 22.340 23 23 24 24 22 22 23.050 24 23 27 26 24 23 24.760 28 25 33 30 29 25 28.370 32 29 40 36 38 28 33.980 44 34 47 43 48 32 41.490 61 41 52 52 60 36 50.2

100 79 50 57 62 79 42 61.7110 91 58 62 71 98 48 71.6120 97 71 67 79 103 56 78.6130 102 88 73 85 107 62 86.0140 105 97 77 91 108 71 91.3150 107 99 82 96 109 78 95.2160 108 102 87 104 110 86 99.4170 109 106 95 114 111 97 105.4180 112 109 108 116 112 104 110.3190 113 112 115 118 114 116 114.6200 115 113 118 119 114 118 116.4210 117 114 119 120 115 119 117.5220 118 117 120 121 116 120 118.6230 119 118 121 122 117 121 119.4240 120 120 121 122 117 121 120.2250 121 121 121 123 117 121 120.7260 121 122 122 123 118 121 121.1270 122 122 122 124 118 122 121.6280 122 123 122 124 119 122 122.0290 123 123 123 125 119 122 122.5300 123 124 123 126 119 123 123.1310 127 120 123 123.1320 128 121 123 123.9330 125 126 125 128 121 124 124.9340 129 122 124 125.2350 131 122 125 125.9

Page 288: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

288

Appendix F

Board 1 Thermocouples Board 2 ThermocouplesTime 1 2 3 1 2 3 Average

360 128 128 128 132 123 126 127.5370 133 124 127 127.8380 134 124 128 128.7390 131 131 131 135 126 128 130.2400 136 127 129 130.7410 137 128 131 131.9420 134 134 134 139 129 132 133.6430 140 130 133 134.3440 141 131 134 135.4450 137 137 138 143 133 135 137.2460 144 134 137 138.1470 146 135 138 139.4480 141 142 142 147 137 139 141.2490 148 138 141 142.2500 149 139 142 143.5510 146 145 147 151 141 143 145.3520 152 142 144 146.3530 154 143 146 147.8540 149 149 151 155 146 147 149.5550 157 147 149 150.7560 158 148 150 151.9570 154 153 155 159 149 152 153.8580 161 151 153 155.0590 162 153 154 156.5600 158 157 159 163 154 156 157.9630 162 162 163 168 158 160 162.1660 166 166 167 171 162 164 166.0690 170 169 170 175 167 168 169.8720 173 173 174 178 171 172 173.4750 177 176 177 182 174 175 176.7780 180 179 180 184 177 178 179.9810 183 182 182 187 181 181 182.7840 185 185 186 189 183 184 185.4870 188 187 188 192 186 187 187.9900 190 189 190 194 188 189 190.1930 192 192 192 196 191 191 192.3960 194 194 194 198 193 193 194.2990 196 196 196 199 195 195 196.0

1020 197 197 197 201 197 196 197.51050 198 199 198 202 198 198 199.01080 200 200 200 203 199 199 200.41110 201 201 201 204 201 200 201.51140 202 202 202 206 202 202 202.71170 203 203 203 207 203 203 203.71200 204 204 204 207 204 204 204.7

Page 289: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

289

Temperature Profile Data

Table F-2. 1 wt. % ThermocarbTM Specialty Graphite core temperature data.

Board 1 Thermocouples Board 2 ThermocouplesTime 1 2 3 1 2 3 Average

0 21 21 21 21 21 21.110 22 22 22 24 22 22 22.220 23 22 22 23 22 22 22.330 23 22 22 23 22 22 22.340 23 22 23 23 23 23 22.950 24 23 24 24 23 27 24.360 26 26 27 27 26 31 26.970 30 33 31 31 29 37 31.980 34 43 36 38 34 43 38.090 39 54 42 47 40 49 45.1

100 44 64 49 55 46 56 52.3110 51 73 59 64 52 64 60.3120 59 81 73 73 58 72 69.4130 67 92 94 83 63 84 80.6140 74 108 100 99 71 103 92.6150 81 112 103 111 90 110 101.2160 91 113 106 114 105 113 106.9170 105 114 109 117 112 114 111.8180 114 115 111 118 115 116 114.9190 118 116 114 119 116.9200 120 117 116 121 119 119 118.6210 121 118 117 122 120 121 119.6220 121 118 118 122 121 121 120.2230 122 119 119 123 121 121 120.8240 122 119 120 123 122 122 121.2250 123 119 121 123 122 122 121.8260 123 120 121 123 122 123 122.1270 124 120 122 123 123 123 122.5280 124 121 122 124 123 124 123.0290 124 121 123 124 123 124 123.3300 125 121 123 124 123 125 123.6310 126 122 124 124 124 126 124.4320 127 122 125 125 124 127 124.9330 128 123 126 125 124 127 125.6340 128 124 127 126 125 128 126.2350 129 125 127 126 126 129 127.0

Page 290: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

290

Appendix F

Board 1 Thermocouples Board 2 ThermocouplesTime 1 2 3 1 2 3 Average

360 131 126 128 127 127 130 128.1370 131 127 129 128 127 131 128.9380 132 128 130 128 128 132 129.7390 133 129 131 129 129 133 130.8400 135 130 132 131 130 134 132.0410 136 131 133 131 131 136 133.0420 137 132 134 132 132 137 134.1430 138 134 136 133 133 138 135.4440 140 135 137 134 134 139 136.6450 141 136 138 136 136 141 137.9460 142 138 139 137 136 142 139.0470 144 139 141 138 137 143 140.3480 145 141 142 139 138 144 141.6490 147 142 143 141 140 146 143.1500 148 143 144 142 141 147 144.4510 149 145 146 143 142 149 145.7520 151 147 147 144 144 150 147.1530 152 148 148 146 145 152 148.5540 153 149 149 147 147 153 149.9550 155 151 151 149 148 154 151.4560 157 153 152 151 149 156 153.0570 158 154 153 152 151 157 154.1580 159 156 155 153 152 159 155.6590 161 157 156 155 153 160 156.9600 162 158 157 156 155 162 158.4630 166 163 161 161 159 166 162.5660 170 167 164 165 163 170 166.7690 173 171 168 169 167 174 170.2720 177 174 171 173 171 177 173.7750 180 178 173 176 174 180 176.9780 183 181 176 180 178 183 180.3810 186 184 179 183 181 186 183.1840 188 187 181 186 184 188 185.7870 191 189 183 189 186 191 188.2900 193 192 186 191 189 193 190.6930 195 194 187 193 191 195 192.6960 197 195 189 196 193 197 194.4990 199 197 191 197 195 198 196.2

1020 200 199 192 199 197 200 197.91050 202 201 193 201 199 201 199.41080 203 202 194 202 200 202 200.61110 204 202 198 203 201 203 202.01140 205 203 197 204 202 204 202.71170 206 205 198 206 204 205 203.91200 207 206 199 207 205 206 204.8

Page 291: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

291

Temperature Profile Data

Table F-3. 0.5 wt. % ThermocarbTM Specialty Graphite core temperature data.

Board 1 Thermocouples Board 2 ThermocouplesTime 1 2 3 1 2 3 Average

0 22 22 21 21 21 21 21.210 23 22 23 23 23 22 22.720 24 22 23 23 23 22 22.930 24 23 23 23 23 22 22.940 25 24 23 23 24 22 23.650 26 28 25 24 24 24 25.260 29 34 27 26 27 27 28.470 34 42 32 30 30 33 33.680 39 50 36 34 34 39 38.990 45 59 42 40 39 48 45.4

100 52 68 48 47 46 58 53.1110 58 74 56 54 52 73 61.2120 65 82 65 61 58 88 69.9130 72 89 74 78.5140 78 96 83 75 73 112 86.1150 84 103 93 82 82 114 92.9160 91 110 102 89 92 114 99.6170 99 116 108 101 104 115 107.1180 107 117 113 119 116 114.4190 117 118 116 121 118 116 117.7200 122 119 118 123 120 117 119.7210 125 120 119 123 121 118 121.0220 126 121 120 124 122 118 121.8230 127 121 121 124 123 118 122.5240 128 122 121 124 123 118 122.8250 128 123 122 124 124 119 123.3260 129 123 122 124 124 119 123.6270 129 124 123 125 124 119 124.2280 130 125 123 125 124 119 124.5290 131 126 124 125 126 120 125.2300 131 126 125 126 126 121 125.6310 132 127 126 126 127 121 126.5320 133 128 127 126 127 122 127.0330 133 129 127 127 128 122 127.7340 134 130 128 128 129 123 128.8350 136 131 129 128 129 124 129.6

Page 292: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

292

Appendix F

Board 1 Thermocouples Board 2 ThermocouplesTime 1 2 3 1 2 3 Average

360 136 132 130 129 130 125 130.4370 137 134 131 130 131 126 131.5380 138 134 132 131 132 127 132.5390 139 136 134 132 133 128 133.6400 140 137 134 133 134 129 134.6410 141 138 136 134 136 131 135.9420 142 139 137 135 137 132 137.0430 143 141 138 136 138 133 138.1440 145 142 140 137 139 134 139.4450 146 143 141 139 141 136 140.9460 147 145 143 140 142 137 142.2470 148 146 144 142 143 138 143.5480 149 147 146 143 144 139 144.7490 151 148 147 144 146 141 146.3500 152 150 148 146 147 143 147.6510 153 151 150 147 148 144 149.1520 155 153 151 148 150 146 150.5530 156 154 153 150 152 147 152.0540 157 156 154 151 153 149 153.2550 159 157 156 153 154 151 154.8560 160 159 157 154 156 152 156.4570 161 160 158 156 157 153 157.5580 163 161 160 157 158 155 159.1590 164 162 161 159 160 157 160.5600 165 164 163 160 161 158 161.9630 169 168 167 164 165 163 165.9660 172 171 171 169 169 167 169.7690 176 174 174 173 173 171 173.4720 179 178 177 176 176 174 176.8750 182 181 181 180 179 178 180.1780 185 183 183 183 183 181 183.1810 187 186 186 186 186 184 185.8840 190 188 188 189 188 187 188.5870 192 191 191 191 191 190 190.7900 194 192 193 194 193 192 193.0930 196 194 194 196 195 194 194.8960 197 196 196 198 197 196 196.6990 199 197 198 199 199 198 198.3

1020 200 199 199 201 200 199 199.71050 202 200 201 202 201 201 201.11080 203 201 202 204 202 202 202.31110 204 202 203 205 204 203 203.51140 205 203 203 206 205 204 204.41170 206 204 204 207 206 205 205.21200 207 205 206 208 207 206 206.3

Page 293: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

293

Viscosity Data

Appendix G. Viscosity Data

This appendix contains viscosity data on the resin/filler mixtures. The procedure

for measuring the viscosity involved two parts: mixing the resin and filler in the

appropriate ratios and measuring the viscosity of the mixtures. Below is a brief

procedure used to make the resin/filler mixtures. Table G-1 contains the mixing data.

Mixing Procedure:

1. Tare large plastic beaker. Pour ~600 mL resin into beaker. Weigh.

2. Calculate target filler amount. [Multiplying Factor]*[Resin Wt.] =

[Target Filler Wt.]

3. Tare weighing dish. Weigh filler. Add filler to resin.

4. Mix resin on medium-low until blended.

5. Pour 500 mL of mixture into 600-mL beaker.

5. Place thermometer in beaker.

6. Clean mixer.

Below is a brief procedure used to measure the viscosity of the resin/filler mixtures

and a list of viscometer settings. Table G-2 contains the viscosity measurements.

Measurement Procedure:

1. Record resin temperature.

2. Mix resin on medium-low. Pre-wet spindle, and set viscometer height.

3. Remix resin on medium-low.

4. Measure viscosity and % Torque after 6 seconds, using #2 spindle and

50 rpm.

5. Repeat steps 3 and 4, two more times.

6. Clean mixer and viscometer.

Viscometer Settings:

Viscometer Model: DV-II+

Page 294: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

294

Appendix G

Table G-1. Mixing data for viscosity measurements of resin/filler mixtures.

Filler

Loading (g filler/4 g wet resin)

Multiplying Factor

Resin Wt. (g)

Target Filler Wt.

(g)Filler Wt.

(g)

Control -- -- 562.7 -- --

TC 0.50 0.1250 604.0 75.500 75.507TC 0.75 0.1875 605.3 113.494 113.494TC 1.00 0.2500 602.4 150.600 150.600

CTC 0.50 0.1250 604.4 75.550 75.551CTC 0.75 0.1875 600.9 112.669 112.669CTC 1.00 0.2500 602.2 150.550 150.550

L 0.50 0.1250 609.8 76.225 76.225L 0.75 0.1875 604.1 113.269 113.269L 1.00 0.2500 602.1 150.525 150.525

S 0.50 0.1250 601.2 75.150 75.149S 0.75 0.1875 610.5 114.469 114.469S 1.00 0.2500 603.0 150.750 150.750

BN 0.50 0.1250 604.5 75.563 75.563BN 0.75 0.1875 591.0 110.803 110.811BN 1.00 0.2500 609.1 152.275 152.275

Container Size: 600-mL Kimax

Sample Size: approx. 500 mL

Spindle Guard: yes

Spindle Number: #2

Rotational Speed: 50 rpm (if otherwise, listed in parenthesis after

torque reading)

Spindle Guard: yes

Spindle Number: #2

Rotational Speed: 50 rpm (if otherwise, listed in parenthesis after

torque reading)

Page 295: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

295

Viscosity D

ata

Table G-2. Viscosity measurements of resin/filler mixtures.

Torque (%)

Viscosity (cP)

Torque (%)

Viscosity (cP)

Torque (%)

Viscosity (cP)

Control -- 24.7 22.1 176.8 22.2 177.6 22.2 177.6

TC 0.50 24.9 38.8 308.8 40.4 321.6 39.3 318.4

TC 0.75 24.7 60.9 491.2 60.9 490.4 60.9 493.6TC 1.00 24.6 49.3 (20) 990.0 50.3 (20) 1006 50.4 (20) 1008

CTC 0.50 24.5 35.3 284.0 35.0 284.0 35.0 284.0

CTC 0.75 24.7 45.5 370.4 46.0 372.0 45.8 371.2CTC 1.00 24.6 63.4 512.0 63.9 517.6 64.5 521.6

L 0.50 24.5 32.8 264.8 33.0 267.2 33.1 267.2

L 0.75 24.6 40.9 328.8 41.0 329.6 41.3 334.4L 1.00 24.7 53.6 431.2 53.6 432.0 54.1 434.4

S 0.50 24.7 40.8 334.4 40.6 333.6 40.7 328.0

S 0.75 24.8 55.3 444.0 54.6 444.8 54.5 446.4S 1.00 24.8 94.5 768.2 94.2 768.8 93.4 766.4

BN 0.50 24.8 47.9 388.0 48.5 389.6 48.7 391.2

BN 0.75 25.0 97.7 788.8 98.5 793.6 99.2 799.2BN 1.00 24.6 72.1 (10) 2908 73.1 (10) 2940 74.1 (10) 2960

Control -- 23.8 24.0 192.8 23.9 192.0 24.0 192.0

Filler

Loading (g filler/4 g wet resin)

Reading 2 Reading 3Sample Temperature

(C)

Reading 1

Page 296: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

296

Appendix H

Appendix H. Thermal Conductivity Data

This appendix contains the thermal conductivity data of waferboard and resin/filler

mixtures. Table H-1 contains the waferboard thermal conductivity data, Table H-2

contains the resin/filler thermal conductivity data, and Table H-3 contains density

measurements of the resin/filler samples. The “PF” samples in Tables H-2 and H-3

indicate the pure PF samples.

Table H-1. Thermal conductivity data from selected Experiment 2 waferboard.

NameSampleNumber

Thickness(mm)

ThermalResistance

(m2K/W)

ThermalConductivity

(W/mK)C2-C-B10 1 18.15 0.136421 0.133044C2-C-B10 2 18.10 0.140666 0.128674C2-C-B10 3 18.13 0.150975 0.120086C2-C-B11 1 20.99 0.160797 0.130537C2-C-B12 1 18.10 0.157669 0.114798C2-CTC-B7 1 18.20 0.149853 0.121452C2-CTC-B7 2 18.14 0.144952 0.125145C2-CTC-B7 3 18.23 0.133824 0.136224C2-CTC-B8 1 18.15 0.153699 0.118088C2-CTC-B9 1 18.13 0.141338 0.128274C2-C-B13 1 18.27 0.140450 0.130082C2-C-B13 2 18.55 0.135393 0.137009C2-C-B13 3 18.30 0.150663 0.121463C2-C-B14 1 18.11 0.137230 0.131969C2-C-B15 1 18.22 0.132875 0.137122C2-CTC-B10 1 18.09 0.139848 0.129355C2-CTC-B10 2 18.21 0.149030 0.122190C2-CTC-B10 3 18.87 0.138228 0.136514C2-CTC-B11 1 18.17 0.139199 0.130533C2-CTC-B12 1 18.30 0.137575 0.133018

Page 297: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

297

Thermal Conductivity Data

Table H-2. Thermal conductivity data from resin/filler mixtures.

SampleThickness

(mm)Diameter

(mm)

ThermalReistance(m2K/W)

ThermalConductivity

(W/mK)PF 1 4.87 44.00 0.01775631 0.2742687PF 2 3.30 37.88 0.01261189 0.2616577TC 1 3.36 36.41 0.00275809 1.2182360PF 3 4.19 42.10 0.01439152 0.2911436PF 4 5.59 45.50 0.01743348 0.3206474CTC 1 8.83 45.35 0.01512324 0.5838696CTC 2 11.15 49.03 0.00842407 1.3235880CTC 3 6.95 48.23 0.00531954 1.3065050CTC 4 8.79 47.10 0.00758041 1.1595680CTC 5 9.17 46.96 0.00613266 1.4952720TC 2 8.59 46.25 0.00574998 1.4939190TC 3 8.86 46.32 0.00510690 1.7349080TC 4 9.29 46.13 0.00765802 1.2131070TC 5 8.94 46.37 0.00732211 1.2209590TC 6 9.25 46.43 0.00772233 1.1978260L 1 9.40 46.24 0.00721153 1.3034680L 2 9.38 46.83 0.00936850 1.0012280L 3 10.20 46.64 0.01016058 1.0038790L 4 8.95 46.65 0.00762917 1.1731290L 5 8.92 46.93 0.00933593 0.9554487BN 1 9.03 45.53 0.00558096 1.6180000BN 2 9.24 45.78 0.00600650 1.5383330BN 3 9.39 45.84 0.00683336 1.3741410BN 4 9.80 46.14 0.00722699 1.3560280BN 5 9.04 45.38 0.00607303 1.4885490S 1 9.35 45.60 0.00405356 2.3066050S 2 9.15 46.44 0.00631385 1.4491960S 3 9.43 46.57 0.00964098 0.9781168S 4 9.55 46.19 0.00565851 1.6877230S 5 9.10 46.03 0.00550514 1.6530020PF 5 10.85 46.12 0.03767955 0.2879546CTC 6 8.62 46.65 0.00592931 1.4537960CTC 7 8.60 46.93 0.00563994 1.5248380CTC 8 8.95 46.66 0.00489060 1.8300400PF 6 9.89 46.10 0.02922796 0.3383747PF 7 6.68 47.54 0.01959085 0.3409755

Page 298: INFLUENCE OF THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE FILLERS ON THE …

298

Appendix H

Table H-3. Density measurements of resin/filler thermal conductivity samples.

Sample

DryWeight

(g)

WetWeight

(g)

CompositeDensity(g/cm3)

FillerWt. %

PF 1 9.8751 2.7170 1.376397 --PF 2 4.5939 1.2644 1.376583 --PF 3 7.9219 2.1552 1.370572 --PF 4 12.0177 3.2060 1.360698 --TC 1 4.8973 1.6465 1.503026 23.5CTC 1 19.2636 5.4010 1.386413 3.9CTC 2 29.4595 9.0064 1.437031 12.8CTC 3 17.6380 5.6160 1.463769 17.3CTC 4 22.5514 7.4107 1.486030 20.8CTC 5 23.2481 7.7143 1.493172 22.0TC 2 21.5502 7.2830 1.506997 24.1TC 3 22.0973 7.4418 1.504314 23.7TC 4 23.1474 7.8522 1.509896 24.6TC 5 22.4490 7.6044 1.508789 24.4TC 6 23.4123 7.9062 1.506404 24.0L 1 23.2841 7.7741 1.497779 22.7L 2 23.8305 7.9212 1.494452 22.2L 3 25.8774 8.5623 1.491062 21.6L 4 21.8375 7.1093 1.479290 19.8L 5 22.7707 7.6970 1.507150 24.1BN 1 22.0939 7.6628 1.527471 27.0BN 2 23.1704 8.1090 1.534858 28.1BN 3 23.6510 8.2900 1.536137 28.3BN 4 24.9224 8.7287 1.535479 28.2BN 5 22.1545 7.7485 1.534329 28.1S 1 22.2606 7.3470 1.489205 21.5S 2 22.7243 7.5404 1.493163 22.1S 3 23.2925 7.5846 1.479442 19.9S 4 23.1192 7.5357 1.480157 20.1S 5 21.9474 7.1436 1.479142 19.9CTC 6 21.8222 7.4409 1.513911 25.2CTC 7 21.9698 7.4736 1.512070 24.9CTC 8 22.7599 7.7556 1.513403 25.1PF 5 23.2885 5.9120 1.337147 --PF 6 22.5027 6.1596 1.373726 --PF 7 15.6113 4.1602 1.360166 --