COST Quality control of wood products in the European timber industry – results from a survey of practices in companies and of consumer expectations Kvalitetskontroll av treprodukter i europeisk treindustri – resultater fra en undersøkelse om praksis i bedrifter og om forbrukerforventninger

REPORT

Ulrike Heinemann, Anders Q. Nyrud and Robert Kliger

ISSN 0333 – 2020

Oslo, August 2010

COST

NTI rap. cost_NTI rap. 67 12.07.10 08.01 Side 1

Quality control of wood products in the European timber industry – results from a survey of practices in companies and of consumer expectations Kvalitetskontroll av treprodukter i europeisk treindustri – resultater fra en undersøkelse om praksis i bedrifter og om forbrukerforventninger

REPORT

Ulrike Heinemann, Anders Q. Nyrud and Robert Kliger

ISSN 0333 – 2020

Oslo, August 2010

NTI rap. cost_NTI rap. 67 12.07.10 08.01 Side 2

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt Adr.: Forskningsveien 3 B P.B. 113 Blindern NO-0314 Oslo Tel: +47 22 96 55 00 Fax: +47 22 60 42 91 [email protected] www.treteknisk.no Bank: 9680.36.29894

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

3

Quality control of wood products in the European timber industry – results from a survey of practices in companies and of consumer expectations Kvalitetskontroll av treprodukter i europeisk treindustri – resultater fra en undersøkelse om praksis i bedrifter og om forbrukerforventninger Authors: Date:

Ulrike Heinemann 1, Anders Q. Nyrud2 and Robert Kliger 3 August 2010

Summary During the summer of 2008, members of the COST Action E53 conducted a survey in the European timber industry to determine what customers of wood products demand and expect of producers concerning the quality of different wood products. In addition, the producers’ views of and experiences with quality aspects, as well as the production practices, were surveyed to determine if production of timber products is conducted according to standards. The survey’s aim was also to assess how communication between the industries in the timber products value chain can be improved. The survey involved several parts in the value chain – the primary processing industry as producer of the raw material “sawn timber” out of round wood, the secondary processing industry that uses sawn timber as raw material for further processing, traders of sawn timber products and companies that work within building, construction and design using sawn timber products near the end of the chain. The companies were surveyed in order to learn their views of, and requirements for, the quality of timber products, if and how production of timber products is conducted according to standards, and if and how the communication between the different parts can be increased or enhanced. Also the companies’ knowledge about, and utilisation of, improved procedures of quality control were examined in order to achieve a basis for consideration of improvements. The survey was carried out via the internet. Producers and customers answered different questionnaires in order to be able to optimally survey their different requirements and standards. The structure of the questionnaires can be seen

Diploma student in wood science and technologies, University of Hamburg, Germany Senior researcher, Norsk Treteknisk Institutt, Norway 3 Professor, Chalmers University of Technology, Sweden 1 2

Stikkord: Keywords:

Kvalitetskontroll, europeisk treindustri, spørreundersøkelse Quality control, European timber industry, survey Report COST

4

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

in Figure 2. In actuality, the questions in the questionnaire for the sawmilling industry and the questions for the processing industry, and thus the questions to all producers, were the same. Wood industry companies in 25 European countries were addressed in the survey. Companies responded on a voluntary basis, and the distribution of respondents is therefore not weighted in proportion to the distribution of business type or the relative size of the timber value chain in each country. A total of 1092 respondents participated in the survey, 772 responses could be used for further analysis. For a detailed overview of the number of responses in each business domain, see Table 2. Most participating companies work only with softwood. Therefore, the analysis will focus on these companies. In order to compare survey results to a fictive ideal of the industry’s view of quality aspects, the analysis was oriented towards certain research statements/questions that were formulated by the three Working Groups and the Task Group of the COST Action E53. The results show that most customers have a clear perception of what quality parameters that matter and frequently specify their requirements as a part of the contract when ordering timber products. In particular, the customers focus on twist distortion, strength and strength classes as well as moisture content. The customers’ requirements are generally consistent across Europe’s building and construction industries. There are minor differences in the importance of the mechanical parameters between regions. In general, the customers are satisfied with the quality of the products they receive and see the timber industry capable of delivering the right quality. Most companies, however, have experienced quality that does not meet their requirements and have then sent the timber back to the producers. The communication of the customers’ requirements and satisfaction back to the producers might be interrupted in some fields. Regarding moisture content and colour, the communication seems to be adequate and the priorities of the two parts match each other. However, when it comes to distortion, there is a potential for improving the quality of timber products and the customers’ satisfaction. This may be achieved by improving the communication between customers and producers and instructing producers in issues of distortion. According to the results, producers have in general poor knowledge about how the quality parameters the customers require can be influenced in the production processes (cf. Kliger 2010). Still, most processing companies perform some kind of quality control. Most of them perform visual inspection; random sampling and measurements are also frequently carried out. Regarding the moisture content, a kind of harmonised concept for assessment and control can be observed, but this harmonised concept is not advanced. Allowable degrees of case hardening or acceptable limits for deformation or distortion are seldom applied in the processing industry. Few customers make claims related to Report COST

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

5

discolouration. Summarised, a harmonised concept for assessment and control of drying quality can be partly observed. The results of questions related to grading could give grounds to believe that the topic of grading timber products is of less importance for the processing industry than drying-related issues. According to the results, grading is mainly done visually, and accordingly mostly visible parameters lead to rejection or downgrading. The visible parameters are also more important to the customers than the mechanical parameters. These results indicate that there is a kind of congruency in producers’ and customers’ requirements. The present results indicate that scanning techniques over and above machine strength grading are still fairly uncommon in the European wood processing industry. Respondents using or planning to use scanning techniques make up no more than 8 % of the respondents. Given the low response rate, it is difficult to draw conclusions from the data. The usage of scanning in grading operations is also fairly uncommon – most of the companies participating in the survey used visual grading by eye. It is reasonable to believe that only a small number of producers have enough knowledge about the techniques and their benefits. The results also show that the production of timber products is conducted more traditionally than along advanced lines. Standards in form of applying strength classes and CE-marking of products are seldom used, if the high number of respondents who did not answer is to be so interpreted. Potential for improving lies in an increased usage of grading, not least since customers require strength graded timber products. CE-marking of the products would be of interest especially to traders, since they often obtain their materials in international markets, and CE-marking facilitates at least European trading.

Report COST

6

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

Sammendrag Medlemmer av COST Action E53 utførte sommeren 2008 en spørreundersøkelse i den europeiske treindustrien for å fastslå hva kunder av treprodukter krever og forventer av produsenter når det gjelder kvalitet på forskjellige treprodukter. Produsentenes syn på og erfaringer med kvalitetsaspekter ble også undersøkt, i likhet med produksjonsmetoder, for å fastslå om produksjon av treprodukter blir utført i henhold til gjeldende standarder. Spørreundersøkelsens mål var også å se på hvordan kommunikasjonen mellom de forskjellige industriene i verdikjeden kan forbedres. Undersøkelsen omfattet flere deler i verdikjeden – primær foredlingsindustri, som produsent av råmaterialet ”trelast” fra rundvirke; sekundær foredlingsindustri, som benytter trelast til videreforedling; forhandlere av trelastprodukter og bedrifter som arbeider innen bygging, konstruksjon og design og som bruker trelastprodukter nær enden av kjeden. Bedriftene ble spurt for å fastslå deres syn på og krav til kvaliteten på treprodukter, om og hvordan produksjon av treprodukter utføres i henhold til standardene, og om og hvordan kommunikasjonen mellom de forskjellige delene kan økes eller forbedres. Også bedriftenes kunnskap om og utnyttelse av forbedrede prosedyrer for kvalitetskontroll ble undersøkt for å oppnå et grunnlag for behandling av forbedringene. Spørreundersøkelsen ble utført over internett. Produsenter og kunder besvarte forskjellige spørreskjemaer for optimalt å kunne undersøke deres forskjellige krav og standarder. Treindustribedrifter i 25 europeiske land deltok i undersøkelsen. Bedriftene svarte på frivillig grunnlag, og fordelingen av bedrifter er derfor ikke vektlagt i forhold til fordelingen av foretakstype eller den relative størrelsen på verdikjeden i det enkelte land. Totalt deltok 1092 bedrifter i spørreundersøkelsen, og 772 svar kunne benyttes til videre analyse. De fleste deltakende bedrifter arbeider kun med bartre. Analysen er derfor fokusert på disse bedriftene. For å kunne sammenligne resultatene fra spørreundersøkelsen med et fiktivt ideal for industriens syn på kvalitetsaspekter, ble analysen vinklet mot enkelte ytringer/spørsmål som var formulert av tre WG-er (Working Group) og en TG (Task Group) i COST Action E53. Resultatene viser at de fleste kundene har en tydelig oppfattelse av hvilke kvalitetsparametre som er viktige og som blir spesifisert som en del av kontrakten når de bestiller treprodukter. Kundene fokuserer spesielt på vindskjevhet, styrke og styrkeklasser og også trefuktighet. Kundenes krav er generelt de samme over hele Europa. Det finnes små forskjeller i viktighet når det gjelder mekaniske parametre mellom regioner. Generelt sett er kundene fornøyd med kvaliteten på produktene de mottar og anser at treindustrien er i stand til å levere riktig kvalitet. De fleste bedrifter har imidlertid opplevd kvalitet som ikke møter kravene deres og de har sendt trelasten tilbake til produsenten.

Report COST

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

7

Tilbakemelding til produsent vedrørende kundenes krav og tilfredshet kan på enkelte områder være mangelfull. Når det gjelder trefuktighet og farge synes kommunikasjonen å virke og produsent og kunde er på bølgelengde. Når det gjelder virkesfeil finnes det rom for å forbedre kvaliteten på treproduktene og kundens tilfredshet. Dette kan gjøres ved å forbedre kommunikasjonen mellom kunde og produsent og lære produsentene mer om virkesfeil. I følge resultatene har produsentene lite kunnskap om hvordan kvalitetsparametrene som kundene krever kan påvirkes i produksjonsprosessen (cf. Kliger 2010). De fleste produksjonsbedrifter utfører imidlertid en eller annen form for kvalitetskontroll. De fleste av dem utfører visuell kontroll; tilfeldig prøveuttak og målinger blir også ofte utført. Når det gjelder trefuktighet kan man se en form for harmonisert vurdering og kontroll, men dette harmoniserte konseptet er ikke spesielt moderne. Tillatt grad av yteherding og tillatte grenser for virkesfeil blir sjelden brukt i produksjonsbedriftene. Få kunder klager på misfarging. Sammenfattet kan man si at en harmonisert vurdering og kontroll av tørkekvalitet delvis kan ses. Resultatene fra spørsmålene vedrørende sortering kunne gi grunn til å tro at temaet sortering av treprodukter er av mindre viktighet for produksjonsbedriftene enn tørkerelaterte temaer. I følge resultatene gjøres sortering hovedsaklig visuelt, og følgelig er det de visuelle parametre som fører til vraking eller nedklassing. De visuelle parametrene er derfor viktigere for kundene enn de mekaniske parametrene. Dette resultatet indikerer at det er slags overensstemmelse mellom kravene til produsenten og til kunden. Resultatene i denne rapporten indikerer at bruk av scanning til fordel for maskinell styrkesortering er relativt uvanlig i europeisk treforedlingsindustri. Bedrifter som bruker eller planlegger å bruke scanning utgjør ikke mer enn 8 % av de som svarte. Gitt den lave andelen svar, er det vanskelig å konkludere ut fra dataene. Bruk av scanning innen styrkesortering er også relativt uvanlig – de fleste bedriftene som deltok i undersøkelsen benyttet seg av visuell tilleggssortering. Det er rimelig å anta at bare en liten andel av produsentene har tilstrekkelig kunnskap om scanning og fordelene med denne teknikken. Resultatene viser også at produksjonen av treprodukter skjer langs mer tradisjonelle linjer og ikke de moderne. Standarder for bruk av styrkeklasser og CEmerking av produkter blir sjelden benyttet, hvis det store antallet av bedrifter som ikke svarte kan tolkes slik. Potensialet for forbedring ligger i økt bruk av sortering, ikke minst siden kundene krever styrkesorterte treprodukter. CEmerking av produktene ville være av interesse særlig for trelastforhandlere, siden de ofte henter sine materialer på internasjonale markeder, og CE-merking letter i det minste europeisk handel.

Report COST

8

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

Preface The work presented in this report relates to an internet survey conducted in order to generate qualitative and quantitative knowledge about the demands and expectations that end-users in more than twenty European countries impose on various timber products. The work was conducted within the network of COST Action E53, http://www.CostE53.net (European scientific network within forests, their products and services). The principal aim of this COST Action E53 was to improve methods of quality control in processing round wood and timber to ensure that timber products and components meet the requirements of users. This Cost Action was performed within three working groups (WPs) dealing with “Scanning for wood properties” (WP 1), “Moisture content and distortion” (WP 2) and “Grading for strength, stiffness and appearance” (WP 3). The task group (TG) on “Requirements and specification of end-use-related properties” was created to assist the working groups to focus on the relevant properties. The internet survey was conducted as part of the collaboration between steering committee (SC) members (people chairing the three work groups) and people involved in the TG. A maximum of twelve questions/statements were allowed per working group and twelve for the task group. The questions/statements used in the internet survey were formulated by the following members of the SC and TG respectively: Robert Kliger, TG Anders Q. Nyrud, TG Wolfgang Gard, TG Daniel Ridley-Ellis, TG Arto Usenius, WG1 Udo Hans Sauter, WG1 Johannes Welling, WG2 Knut Magnar Sandland, WG2 Charlotte Bengtsson, WG3 Julia Denzler, WG3 The original questions/statements were formulated in English and were then sent to all the members of the Management Committee of COST E53 to be translated into the various languages of the members participating in this Action. The survey was prepared for publication on the internet by Unni Skreprud and Kristian Bysheim from Norsk Treteknisk Institutt (Treteknisk). It was available on the internet from January to June 2009. The data were processed and analysed by Ulrike Heinemann (University of Hamburg) as part of her thesis (Diplomarbeit) under the supervision of Dr. Anders Q. Nyrud from Treteknisk. Dr Johannes Welling from Johann Heinrich von Thünen-Institut (vTI) was the formal Report COST

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

9

supervisor for Ulrike Heinemann. The report is the original work of Ulrike Heinemann. I would like to acknowledge and thank Dr. Anders Q. Nyrud and Dr. Daniel Ridley-Ellis (Napier University in Edinburgh, UK) for their contribution to the improvement of this report. I also thank Kenneth R. Allen for proofreading the report with regard to the English language. And finally, on behalf of the Management Committee of COST E53 and Ulrike Heinemann, I would like to thank Norsk Treteknisk Institutt (Treteknisk) under the leadership of Dr. Knut Magnar Sandland for sponsoring the internet survey, helping Ulrike Heinemann to produce her thesis and assisting her with the data and the report. Without the goodwill of Treteknisk, this work would not have been possible.

Prof. Robert Kliger Chair of the Management Committee of COST E53

Report COST

10

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

Report COST

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

11

Contents Summary .............................................................................................................................. 3 Sammendrag ........................................................................................................................ 6 Preface................................................................................................................................... 8 1

Introduction ................................................................................................................ 12

2

Methods....................................................................................................................... 18

3

Results ......................................................................................................................... 20 3.1 Trading and building, construction, design ............................................... 20 3.1.1 Aggregated data for trading and building, construction, design21 3.1.2 Regional consideration of results in trading and the building industry ............................................................................................. 35 3.1.3 Discussion regarding trading and building companies ............. 44 3.2 Secondary processing and integrated processing of softwood ............... 45 3.2.1 Aggregated data for secondary and integrated processing of softwood ............................................................................................ 46 3.2.2 Discussion regarding secondary processing and integrated processing of softwood ................................................................... 75 3.3 Primary processing of softwood .................................................................. 76 3.3.1 Aggregated data for primary processing of softwood ............... 77 3.3.2 Discussion regarding the primary processing of softwood..... 101 3.4 Processing of hardwood.............................................................................. 102 3.4.1 Aggregated data for processing of hardwood........................... 103 3.4.2 Discussion regarding processing of hardwood ......................... 119

4

Conclusions............................................................................................................... 119

5

References ................................................................................................................. 124

Report COST

12

1

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

Introduction

Wood as a building material competes with other materials; such as steel, concrete, glass and plastics. Wood is a natural material and has therefore several advantages, e.g., environmental friendliness, sustainability, reasonable cost and the feel-good factor experienced by people who live in houses built of wood. At the same time there is the disadvantage of inhomogeneity of characteristics of natural products. Providing sawn timber products of high quality to customers, and being able to define and describe their quality characteristics precisely are fundamental to improving the competitiveness of wood products over other building materials. Roadmap 2010 is a strategic project of CEI-Bois with the aim of “increasing use of wood products in Europe in order to secure the future of the industry” (cf. CEI-Bois. Roadmap 2010). The fulfilment of this aim is more likely when customers, i.e., end-users and the building industry, are satisfied with the quality of the sawn timber products they obtain. The prospects for wood products increase, thanks to direct and indirect marketing by satisfied customers. Aspects of Roadmap 2010 are incorporated in the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) of the COST Action E53 and its Technical Annex. According to the MoU, the main objective of the Action is “to improve methods of quality control in processing of round wood and timber to ensure that timber products and components meet the requirements of the users” and “information resulting from this Action can be used by the forestry wood chain to increase the use of timber products.” During the summer of 2008, members of the COST Action E53 conducted a survey in the European timber industry to determine what customers of wood products demand and expect of producers concerning the quality of different wood products. In addition, the producers’ views of and experience with quality aspects, as well as the production practices, were surveyed to determine if production of timber products is conducted according to standards. The survey’s aim was also to assess how communication between the industries in the timber products value chain can be improved. The survey involved several parts in the value chain – the primary processing industry as producer of the raw material “sawn timber” out of round wood, the secondary processing industry that uses sawn timber as raw material for further processing, traders of sawn timber products and companies that work within building, construction and design using sawn timber products near the end of the chain (Figure 1). Different segments in the value chain were surveyed in order to learn the companies’ views of, and requirements for, the quality of timber products, if and how production of timber products are conducted according to standards, and if and how the communication between the different parts can be increased or enhanced. Report COST

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

13

Also the companies’ knowledge about, and utilisation of, improved procedures of quality control were examined in order to achieve a basis for consideration of improvements.

Forestry = supplier of round wood

Sawmilling industry = primary processing

Further processing of sawn timber = secondary processing

Building, construction, designing with sawn timber products

End-users = building owners, etc.

Trading

Figure 1: The value chain and its surveyed elements. The survey was carried out via the internet, with invitations distributed via contact databases. Producers and customers answered different questionnaires in order to be able to optimally survey their different requirements and standards. The structure of the questionnaires can be seen in Figure 2. In actuality, the questions in the questionnaire for the sawmilling industry and the questions for the processing industry, and thus the questions to all producers, were the same. More information about the construction of the questionnaires is given in Chapter 2. Introduction Country, demographic data The companies’ activity

Sawmilling industry

Processing industry

Construction

1. Production of sawn timber

3. Both production and further processing of sawn timber products

4. Trading of sawn timber products

2. Further processing of sawn timber products

5. Building, construction, designing

Figure 2: Structure of questionnaires.

Report COST

14

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

Wood industry companies in 25 European countries were addressed in the survey. Figure 3 shows the number of responses from each country in the study and their distribution in the different questionnaires. Companies responded on a voluntary basis, and the distribution of respondents is therefore not weighted in proportion to the distribution of business type or the relative size of the timber value chain in each country.

Figure 3: Number of respondents from each country and questionnaire that were used in the study. Not all countries are represented in every business domain. When examining regional differences of some results, it may be important to keep this in mind, since not all countries of one region are represented in all questionnaires. Countries represented by business domain can be seen in Table 1.

Report COST

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

15

Table 1: Business domains in which the different countries are represented in the study. Country 1. Austria 2. Belgium 3. Bulgaria 4. Croatia 5. Denmark 6. Finland 7. France 8. Germany 9. Greece 10. Hungary 11. Ireland 12. Italy 13. Latvia 14. Lithuania 15. Netherlands 16. Norway 17. Poland 18. Portugal 19. Serbia 20. Slovakia 21. Slovenia 22. Spain 23. Sweden 24. Switzerland 25. United Kingdom

1 x x

2 x x 0

x

x 0

x

x 0

x x

x x 0 0

x

x 0

x x x x x x x x x x x

x x x x 0 x x x x x x x

3 x x 0 x x 0 x 0 x x 0 0 x 0 x x x x x x x 0 x x x x

4 x x

5

1 = Primary processing

x x

2 = Secondary processing

0 x 0 0 x x 0 0 x 0 x x x 0 x x x x x x x

0

3 = Integrated production

0

4 = Trading

x 0 0 x 0 x x 0 0 x 0 0 x x x

0

5 = Building/construction/designing X = represented

0 0

0 = not represented

0 0

0 0 0 x x x x 0 x

A total of 1092 respondents participated in the survey. After sorting out those that could not be used for further analysis because of incompleteness or obvious incorrectness, 772 responses remained. For a detailed overview of the number of responses in each business domain, see Table 2. Table 2: Total number of respondents in the different business domains. Questionnaire Sawmilling

Business domain 1. Production (primary processing) 2. Further processing (secondary processing) Processing industry 3. Production + Processing (primary + secondary) Construction 4. Trading 5. Building/construction/design Total

Number of respondents Share 176 22.80 % 165 21.37 % 220 28.50 % 63 8.16 % 148 19.17 % 772 100.00 %

Report COST

16

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

Most participating companies work only with softwood. Therefore, the analysis will focus on these companies. An overview of the companies working with hardwood is presented in Chapter 3.4. See the number of companies working with the different types of wood in Table 3. Here, the users did not specify the wood species. Table 3: Types of wood being processed in different business domains. Type of wood Softwood Hardwood Both No answer Settlement of rounding difference [%] Total

Primary processing Secondary processing Integrated processing [n (%)] [n (%)] [n (%)] 128 (72.7) 99 (60.0) 127 (57.7) 19 (10.8) 22 (13.3) 39 (17.7) 28 (15.9) 41 (24.8) 52 (23.6) 1 (0.6) 3 (1.8) 2 (0.9) 0 176 (100)

0.1 165 (100)

0.1 220 (100)

In order to compare survey results to a fictive ideal of the industry’s view of quality aspects, the analysis was oriented towards certain research statements/ questions that were formulated by the three Working Groups and the Task Group of the COST Action E53. These research statements/questions are taken from the attachment of the minutes from the Task Group meeting in Oslo, Norway, in October 2009 and have now been numbered in order to be able to structure this work: Working Group 1 (Scanning for wood properties): A) Forest enterprises and wood industries have expectations how scanning techniques can contribute/help to get the most value out of the round wood resource available in Europe. B)

The available scanning techniques for round wood and sawn timber are sufficiently established in the grading operations and production processes along the wood supply chain to get the highest value out of the resource and to make the production process most efficient.

Working Group 2 (Moisture content and distortion): C)

European purchasers of kiln dried timber have a clear perception of quality features (moisture content, distortion, discolouration) and know how these quality features can be influenced by the producers of kiln dried timber.

Report COST

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

17

D) A harmonised concept for assessment and controlling of drying quality (moisture content, case hardening, distortion, discolouration) exists and is widely used throughout Europe for satisfying the expectations of the users of kiln dried sawn timber. Working Group 3 (Strength, stiffness and appearance grading): E)

The standard for stress-graded timber matches user requirements.

F)

User requirements are consistent across Europe.

G) Downgrading of structural timber varies according to 1) grader technology, 2) softwood/hardwood species, 3) grade produced and 4) end-user/customer. Task Group (construction): H) Customer satisfaction is well communicated backwards in chain. I)

Important grading parameters vary from standards to producers, traders and end-users. I1) Do priorities according to producers match priorities according to end-users? I2) What is the potential for improving properties of wood products through grading standards, processing, silviculture? I3) Is production conducted according to standards?

J)

User requirements are consistent for different products. J1) Functional requirements set by traders are significantly different from requirements set by builders.

Because the research statements should describe an ideal future scenario, the statement J1 should rather be that “the requirements set by traders are the same as the requirements set by builders”, since builders buy their material from traders.

Report COST

18

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

2

Methods

The topics of the survey were based on the fields of the three Working Groups and the Task Group of the Action. Each group decided on the questions of the respecttive field of work to be included in the questionnaires, i.e. Working Group 1 for Scanning for wood properties, Working Group 2 for Moisture content and distortion, Working Group 3 for Strength, stiffness and appearance grading and the Task Group for Requirements and specification of end use related properties and quality aspects. The Task Group was also responsible for an introductory questionnaire, which all respondents were required to complete at the beginning of the survey. In the final question of the introductory questionnaire, the companies were asked to identify in which of the following business domains they would classify themselves: •

Primary processing of timber products

•

Secondary processing of timber products

•

Integrated production of timber products

•

Trading of timber products

• Building, construction and design with timber products Each company was directed either to a producers’ questionnaire or to the customers’ questionnaire based on the answers to this question (Figure 2). The questionnaire for customers (trading and building, construction, design) was designed by the Task Group. The questionnaire included a general part for the classification of the companies, e.g., which type of products that are being used, what markets are being used for buying material or for selling products. The general part was followed by a part with specific questions about important quality parameters, quality requirements, quality control and satisfaction with the received quality. The questionnaires for producers were designed by the Working Groups. In practice, all types of producers received the same questions in their questionnaire. These questionnaires also included a general part for the classification of the companies, e.g., which type of wood is being used or which raw material markets are being served. In addition, the companies’ agreement with selected general statements about quality and quality control of timber products was queried. The general part was followed by a part with specific questions related to drying quality of timber products (moisture content, distortion and colour), quality control concerning drying quality, strength, stiffness and appearance grading of timber products and scanning techniques in the production. The questions in the survey were mostly closed-ended in the form of multiple choice questions with the possibility to choose one or sometimes more answers. Report COST

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

19

Where answers were restricted to one choice only, this was mainly for questions where the respondents were asked to rate specific topics on a scale, e.g., the importance of quality parameters, the frequency of claims or of satisfaction, and the agreement-to statements. There were also several open-ended questions. Based on the questions from the Working Groups and the Task Group, an original English-language version of the questionnaires was constructed by Robert Kliger (Chalmers University of Technology, Sweden), Daniel Ridley-Ellis (Centre for Timber Engineering, Edinburgh Napier University, UK), Anders Q. Nyrud, Kristian Bysheim and Unni Skreprud (Treteknisk, Norway). The English version was then translated by the country representatives, and the questionnaires were finally available in 17 languages: Bulgarian, Croatian, Dutch, English, Finnish, French, German, Greek, Italian, Lithuanian, Norwegian, Polish, Serbian, Slovakian, Slovenian, Spanish and Swedish. The final questionnaires were made available online. Members of the COST Action E53 informed the industries about the survey via personal contact; such as letters, e-mail, telephone or a representative’s visit to the companies, or via an announcement in technical journals, in trade journals, at relevant home pages on the internet, etc. The survey was open for five months, from February 2009 to June 2009. After that, the data were compiled and edited. The raw data sets were sorted according to language and business domain. Based on this, one file for each country was prepared. During the preparation of the data for analysis, some respondents’ answers had to be excluded because of incompleteness or obvious error. To determine which respondents were to be excluded, the country files were sent to the country representatives, who checked the data and decided which respondents to exclude. It was decided to consider those respondents incomplete who did not fill in the questionnaires further than the general part in the specific questionnaire. Duplicate responses were also excluded. Duplicate responses were when the same respondent, identified by the IP-address, filled in the whole or parts of the survey two times or more with essentially identical responses. It was then decided to include only the first and most complete version in the evaluation. In some countries the COST representatives contacted the industry in person and later filled in the online questionnaire themselves according to the answers received. It was therefore important to identify and not delete these multiple IPaddresses. Also test runs from members of the COST Action had to be identified and deleted. The same applied to responses which seemed illogical because of local circumstances or other reasons. Here the cooperation and feedback of the country representatives was of greatest importance. In the country files where no feedback was given, only the obviously incomplete responses were deleted. Results presented in this report are based on the cleaned data sets. Report COST

20

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

While screening the responses to the questions, it appeared that in nearly all questions there were missing values. The questionnaires for the trading and building/construction companies were generally more complete than the producers’ questionnaires. In general for all questionnaires, one can say that there were less complete answers at the end of the survey than in the beginning. In the producers’ questionnaire, the section about drying quality was most complete and the section about scanning techniques was least complete.

3

Results

3.1 Trading and building, construction, design Customers’ satisfaction with the delivered product quality is a central question in the survey and in the analysis. Therefore, the customers’ results are presented first. Companies that work within trading and building/construction/design with sawn timber products are considered to be customers for processed sawn timber products. Companies that work within further processing are first and foremost analysed as producers of timber products, even if they also can be considered as industrial customers using sawn timber as raw material in Chapter 3.2. Those traders that participated in the survey mainly buy timber products from the primary and the secondary processing industry to sell it on to building entrepreneurs, who use the products for building purposes, in construction or design; cf. the green items in Figure 4.

Sawmilling industry = primary processing

Further processing of sawn timber = secondary processing

Building, construction, designing with sawn timber products

Trading

Figure 4: Parts of value chain examined in this chapter. Referring to the Task Group’s research statements, the questions to be examined first and foremost are: Which requirements and priorities do customers have toward the quality of sawn timber products and do traders have the same requirements as the building industry? Since traders buy materials from the Report COST

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

21

sawmilling and processing industry to sell to the building industry, one should assume that they have the same requirements and priorities as the building industry, who buys the materials directly from the processing industry. Customer satisfaction can be measured either by concrete statements from customers or by their reaction toward suppliers, e.g., complaints or returned consignments. Topics to be discussed in this chapter are: a) Visual and mechanical quality parameters b) Customers’ standards and quality control c) Customer satisfaction d) Regional differences 3.1.1

Aggregated data for trading and building, construction, design

3.1.1.1 The companies and their use of timber There were 63 respondents in the trading group and 148 respondents in the building group, which is 8.16 % and 19.17 % respectively of the total number of respondents in the cleaned data set. Both trading companies and building companies are in general small and medium-sized (Figure 5). This is not dissimilar to reality, thus it was assumed that this well represents the real situation in the European timber industry.

Figure 5: Turnover and raw material consumption of survey participants within trading and building [% of respondents].

Report COST

22

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

According to the survey results, building companies predominantly buy and sell their materials on regional or national markets. This suggests that materials bought on international markets are most likely those materials that cannot be found on local markets or that can be obtained on more favourable terms globally. Furthermore, it is easier for a local building company to use traders to obtain products through international markets, as traders typically have the necessary knowledge about specific international terms, regulations and laws. Traders usually buy materials on international markets and sell these products on national and regional markets. Tables 4 and 5 show the details concerning markets. Table 4: Markets for buying materials used by trading and building companies (multiple answers possible). Markets for buying materials Trading [n (%)] Regional markets National markets International markets No answer Settlement of rounding difference [%] Total

22 (34.9) 22 (34.9) 36 (57.1) 0 (0)

Building/construction/design [n (%)] 88 (59.5) 49 (33.1) 34 (23.0) 10 (6.8)

0.1 80 (127)

-0.1 181 (122.3)

Table 5: Markets for selling products used by trading and building companies (multiple answers possible). Markets for selling products Regional markets National markets International markets No answer Settlement of rounding difference [%] Total

Trading [n (%)] 34 (54.0) 34 (54.0) 23 (36.5) 0 (0)

Building/construction/design [n (%)] 92 (62.2) 48 (32.4) 22 (14.9) 8 (5.4)

-0.1 91 (144.4)

0 170 (114.9)

A customer’s satisfaction is very dependent upon context. Before presenting results on customer satisfaction, the context had to be examined, i.e., what the companies work with, what kind of products they use and what the expectations are regarding product quality.

Report COST

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

23

Traders as well as building companies work primarily within fields related to building and construction with sawn timber. Whereas traders usually work in fields related to flooring and joinery, windows, door manufacturing and the like, building companies work within other fields related to building and construction and within building/construction with timber kits. A rather small part of the respondents in both groups work in fields that are not directly affiliated with building and construction; such as furniture production, fencing, garden and other outdoor use and pallets/packaging (Figures 6 and 7).

Figure 6: Fields of timber usage of survey participants within the trading and building industry (multiple answers possible) [% of respondents].

Report COST

24

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

Figure 7: Specific uses of timber in the trading and building industry (multiple answers possible) [% of respondents] According to the results, most companies have specific requirements for their products, and they specify them by a certain standard, which might include allowed proportions of defects; such as knots, cracks, twist or deviant colour, in addition to a given target moisture content. Table 6 gives an overview of the type of products being used.

Report COST

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

25

Table 6: Type of products being bought/sold by the companies in the trading and building industry. Type of products Products (bulk material) Specified products (dried to target MC) Specified products according to a specific standard (more than just MC) No answer Settlement of rounding difference [%] Total

Trading [n (%)] Building/construction/design [n (%)] 13 (20.6) 14 (9.5) 20 (31.7 )

43 (29.1)

30 (47.6) 0 (0)

85 (57.4) 6 (4.1)

0.1 63 (100)

-0.1 148 (100)

The respondents were asked about which strength classes they use. Traders usually use all of the classes except classes higher than C30, which are used by only 6 % of the companies. About two thirds of the building companies use strength classes equal to or between C30 and C24. Glulam grades and classes lower than C24 (but still graded) are used by nearly half of the building companies each. Classes higher than C30 are used by the smallest number of respondents in both groups (Table 7). Respondents could choose several answers. Table 7: Strength classes used by companies in the trading and building industry (multiple answers possible). Strength classes being used Higher than C30 Equal and between C30 and C24 Lower than C24 (but still graded) Ungraded Glulam grades Special grades related to a specific product No answer Settlement of rounding difference [%] Total

Trading [n (%)] 4 (6.3)

Building/construction/design [n (%)] 14 (9.5)

22 (34.9)

97 (65.5)

17 (27.0) 19 (30.2) 19 (30.2)

70 (47.3) 25 (16.9) 72 (48.6)

22 (34.9) 10 (15.9)

43 (29.1) 11 (7.4)

0 113 (179.4)

0 332 (224.3)

Report COST

26

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

3.1.1.2 Requirements, expectations and control Different products should imply different valuations of various quality characteristics. The tendency of quality valuation in the two groups “trading” and “building” were surveyed in one question. The parameters are separated into two groups – visible and mechanical. The visible parameters are the extent of twist distortion, the extent of spring and/ or bow distortion, no discolouration or mould and the extent of visual defects; such as knots, cracks, wane (but not including colour). Higher priorities, i.e. priority 1 or 2, are given to all of these by most of the companies, both trading and building companies. However, in the group of building companies, there are also a substantial number of companies, about 10 %, that do not consider these quality parameters as very important. See for example the extent of spring and/or bow distortion, visual defects or discolouration in Figure 8.

Trading Building 1 = most important 6 = least important NA = no answer

Figure 8: Importance of visible quality parameters according to trading and building companies [% of respondents].

Report COST

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

27

In the mechanical quality parameters’ group, the characteristics of stiffness, density, strength and strength class (grade) are to be found. Strength and strength class are in general more highly prioritised in both business domains. Stiffness and density have medium high priorities among most of the traders. Building entrepreneurs see these two parameters as slightly more important. Remaining parameters are moisture content and the extent of compression wood. These two had been separated from the other parameters as they are parameters in the raw material that can have an influence on the other parameters – on visible as well as on mechanical parameters. At the same time, the moisture content is a parameter that can be influenced by the timber industry, whereas the extent of compression wood is a given natural parameter in the raw material unaffected by human activity. The parameter of compression wood in the raw material can be controlled through sorting and thereby the quality parameters of the processed products. Figures 9, 10 and 11 contain information about the parameters and their importance to the companies.

Trading Building 1 = most important 6 = least important NA = no answer

Figure 9: Importance of mechanical quality parameters according to trading and building companies [% of respondents]. Report COST

28

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

Figure 10: Importance of the moisture content according to trading and building companies [% of respondents].

Figure 11: Importance of the extent of compression wood according to trading and building companies [% of respondents]. In the same question, the respondents were asked about the importance of a low price. As this is not a quality parameter in the strict sense, but is considered to be a product attribute, it has been separated from the other parameters. Approximately two thirds of the respondents in the trading group, as well as in the building group, gave higher priorities to the attribute “low price”, but traders tended more to stay neutral. More details about the priorities concerning the price can be found in Figure 12. Report COST

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

29

Figure 12: Importance of the price as a product attribute according to trading and building companies [% of respondents]. Trading and building companies differ in their approach to the quality and the grades of timber used by customers. Building companies usually have their quality and grade requirements decided in the design office. Traders tend more to not have quality and grade decided in the design office. In both groups, a list of custom requirements is typically used as part in the contract before ordering the timber. The companies usually specify the dimensions, the amount and quality designations according to a standard, as well as buy dried timber with specified moisture content. Approximately two thirds of both trading and building companies perform regular checks of quality specifications of batches of timber directly after delivery. See Tables 8 and 9.

Report COST

30

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

Table 8: Trading companies’ rating of statements regarding different preconditions; 1 = fully agree, 6 = totally disagree.

Statements: Trading [n (%)]

Settlement of rounding difference No 6 answer [%] Total

1

2

3

4

5

We use a list of custom requirements, which are part of the contract before ordering timber

18 (28.6)

10 (15.9)

13 (20.6)

4 (6.3)

5 (7.9)

3 (4.8)

10 (15.9)

0

63 (100)

We only specify dimensions, amount and quality designation according to a standard when timber is ordered

24 (38.1)

8 (12.7)

6 (9.5)

5 (7.9)

6 (9.5)

2 (3.2)

12 (19.0)

0.1

63 (100)

We make regular checks of quality specifications of batches of timber directly after delivery

24 (38.1)

15 (23.8)

6 (9.5)

3 (4.8)

3 (4.8)

2 (3.2)

10 (15.9)

-0.1

63 (100)

We buy dried timber with specified moisture content

24 (38.1)

9 (14.3)

9 (14.3)

4 (6.3)

2 (3.2)

3 (4.8)

12 (19.0)

0

63 (100)

Quality and grades of timber are decided in the design office

12 (19.0)

6 (9.5)

9 (14.3)

5 (7.9)

5 (7.9)

12 (19.0)

14 (22.2)

0.2

63 (100)

We store timber under a roof or tarpaulin

34 (54.0)

6 (9.5)

6 (9.5)

1 (1.6)

3 (4.8)

2 (3.2)

11 (17.5)

-0.1

63 (100)

Report COST

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

31

Table 9: Building companies’ rating of statements regarding different preconditions; 1 = fully agree, 6 = totally disagree.

Statements:

Settlement of rounding No difference 6 answer [%] Total

1

2

3

4

5

36 (24.3)

29 (19.6)

29 (19.6)

16 (10.8)

13 (8.8)

11 (7.4)

14 (9.5)

0

148 (100)

We only specify dimensions, amount and quality designation according to a standard when timber is ordered

56 (37.8)

46 (31.1)

12 (8.1)

8 (5.4)

7 (4.7)

6 (4.1)

13 (8.8)

0

148 (100)

We make regular checks of quality specifications of batches of timber directly after delivery

37 (25.0)

37 (25.0)

28 (18.9)

18 (12.2)

10 (6.8)

5 (3.4)

13 (8.8)

-0.1

148 (100)

We buy dried timber with specified moisture content

47 (31.8)

36 (24.3)

20 (13.5)

11 (7.4)

13 (8.8)

4 (2.7)

17 (11.5)

0

148 (100)

Quality and grades of timber are decided in the design office

64 (43.2)

29 (19.6)

18 (12.2)

9 (6.1)

6 (4.1)

10 (6.8)

12 (8.1)

-0.1

148 (100)

We store timber under a roof or tarpaulin

69 (46.6)

34 (23.0)

12 (8.1)

5 (3.4)

6 (4.1)

6 (4.1)

16 (10.8)

-0.1

148 (100)

We use a list Building, construction, of custom requirements, design which are part [n (%)] of the contract before ordering timber

Report COST

32

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

Based on answers to a more specific question concerning visual inspection, it is evident that companies perform routine visual inspection of the timber products, and that for all surveyed parameters the inspection is primarily done manually. In addition to some of the parameters mentioned in the earlier questions, the companies also inspect the dimensions to assure they are in accordance with the ordered dimensions. Figure 13 gives more information about the visual inspection parameters.

Figure 13: Visual inspection methods used by trading and building companies [% of respondents]. 3.1.1.3 Customers’ satisfaction Most companies that perform a visual inspection have experienced timber rejected and/or sent back after the inspection because the delivered product quality did not meet requirements. The disappointment with the quality sometimes leads to a search for alternative engineered wood products and occasionally to a search for alternative products made of other materials. The search for alternative products caused by unsatisfactory quality is more often observed in trading companies than in building companies. But despite some dissatisfaction, the companies generally seem to be satisfied and to be able to totally agree or agree that the timber industry is capable of delivering timber products that exactly fulfil their requirements. Tables 10 and 11 give detailed information about statements regarding customer satisfaction.

Report COST

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

33

Table 10: Trading companies’ rating of statements regarding their satisfaction; 1 = fully agree, 6 = totally disagree.

Statements: Trading [n (%)]

Settlement of rounding No difference 6 answer [%] Total

1

2

3

4

5

After visual inspection, timber could be rejected and sent back as a result of poor quality

30 (47.6)

9 (14.3)

2 (3.2)

7 (11.1)

1 (1.6)

4 (6.3)

10 (15.9)

0

63 (100)

We have been disappointed by deliveries of insufficient quality and will look to find alternative engineered wood products

3 (4.8)

9 (14.3)

14 (22.2)

6 (9.5)

7 (11.1)

12 (19.0)

12 (19.0)

0.1

63 (100)

We have been disappointed by deliveries of insufficient quality and will look to find alternative products made of other materials

2 (3.2)

5 (7.9)

10 (15.9)

5 (7.9)

14 (22.2)

15 (23.8)

12 (19.0)

0.1

63 (100)

19 (30.2)

15 (23.8)

8 (12.7)

7 (11.1)

2 (3.2)

2 (3.2)

10 (15.9)

-0.1

63 (100)

The timber industry is capable of delivering timber products that exactly fulfil our requirements

Report COST

34

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

Table 11: Building companies’ rating of statements regarding their satisfaction; 1 = fully agree, 6 = totally disagree.

Statements:

Settlement of rounding No difference 6 answer [%] Total

1

2

3

4

5

After visual Building, construction, inspection, timber could design be rejected and [n (%)] sent back as a result of poor quality

65 (43.9)

28 (18.9)

20 (13.5)

6 (4.1)

6 (4.1)

10 (6.8)

13 (8.8)

-0.1

148 (100)

We have been disappointed by deliveries of insufficient quality and will look to find alternative engineered wood products

20 (13.5)

29 (19.6)

22 (14.9)

19 (12.8)

22 (14.9)

18 (12.2)

18 (12.2)

-0.1

148 (100)

We have been disappointed by deliveries of insufficient quality and will look to find alternative products made of other materials

11 (7.4)

24 (16.2)

18 (12.2)

19 (12.8)

24 (16.2)

36 (24.3)

16 (10.8)

0.1

148 (100)

42 (28.4)

36 (24.3)

26 (17.6)

16 (10.8)

10 (6.8)

5 (3.4)

13 (8.8)

-0.1

148 (100)

The timber industry is capable of delivering timber products that exactly fulfil our requirements

An overview of both the trading and building companies’ satisfaction regarding the quality parameters moisture content, distortion, colour, knots and other defects shows overall satisfaction. The majority in both groups are more or less satisfied with the moisture content and colour. Fewer, but still the majority, are satisfied with distortion. Medium satisfaction can be found regarding other defects; such as cracks, dimension, etc. The parameter with the least satisfaction is related to knots. Tables 12 and 13 give an overview of the companies’ satisfaction.

Report COST

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

35

Table 12: Trading companies’ rating of satisfaction related to different properties; 1 = frequently satisfied, 6 = frequently not satisfied.

Trading [n (%)]

Settlement of rounding No difference 6 answer [%] Total

1

2

3

4

5

Moisture content

13 (20.6)

18 (28.6)

13 (20.6)

7 (11.1)

1 (1.6)

1 (1.6)

10 (15.9)

0

63 (100)

Distortion

9 (14.3)

19 (30.2)

10 (15.9)

12 (19.0)

1 (1.6)

3 (4.8)

9 (14.3)

-0.1

63 (100)

Colour

11 (17.5)

17 (27.0)

14 (22.2)

5 (7.9)

5 (7.9)

2 (3.2)

9 (14.3)

0

63 (100)

Knots

11 (17.5)

13 (20.6)

16 (25.4)

6 (9.5)

4 (6.3)

4 (6.3)

9 (14.3)

0.1

63 (100)

Other defects

8 (12.7)

13 (20.6)

13 (20.6)

10 (15.9)

3 (4.8)

2 (3.2)

14 (22.2)

0

63 (100)

Table 13: Building companies’ rating of satisfaction related to different properties; 1 = frequently satisfied, 6 = frequently not satisfied.

1

2

3

4

5

28 (18.9)

51 (34.5)

27 (18.2)

11 (7.4)

11 (7.4)

5 (3.4)

15 (10.1)

0.1

148 (100)

16 (10.8)

37 (25.0)

33 (22.3)

27 (18.2)

14 (9.5)

4 (2.7)

17 (11.5)

0

148 (100)

Colour

24 (16.2)

59 (39.9)

28 (18.9)

15 (10.1)

3 (2.0)

3 (2.0)

16 (10.8)

0.1

148 (100)

Knots

12 (8.1)

42 (28.4)

46 (31.1)

16 (10.8)

14 (9.5)

1 (0.7)

17 (11.5)

-0.1

148 (100)

Other defects

11 (7.4)

35 (23.6)

41 (27.7)

20 (13.5)

14 (9.5)

3 (2.0)

24 (16.2)

0.1

148 (100)

Moisture Building, construction, content design [n (%)] Distortion

3.1.2

No 6 answer

Settlement of rounding difference [%] Total

Regional consideration of results in trading and the building industry

3.1.2.1 The companies and their use of timber The 25 participating countries were categorised by geographical region, and in the analysis they were represented by respondents as follows: •

British Isles (the United Kingdom)

•

Nordic Countries (Finland, Norway and Sweden)

•

Central Europe (Austria, Belgium, Germany, the Netherlands and Switzerland)

•

Eastern Europe (Bulgaria, Croatia, Lithuania, Poland, Serbia, Slovakia and Slovenia)

• Mediterranean Countries (Greece, Italy and Spain, including Portugal) Report COST

36

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

Not all countries had respondents in every questionnaire of the survey, so even in this questionnaire for trading and building companies, not all countries are represented; see Table 1 in the introduction. For differentiation between the trading group and the building, construction and design group in the different regions, see Table 14. Because of a relatively small number of respondents in the trading group, which would become even smaller by a regional separation, the following further analysis will only deal with participants in the building group. Table 14: Number of respondents in the trading and building group by region.

Business Domain Trading Building/construction/design Total

All [n (%)]

British Isles [n (%)]

Nordic Central Countries Europe [n (%)] [n (%)]

Eastern Europe [n (%)]

Mediterranean Countries [n (%)]

63 (30)

2 (11)

17 (18)

16 (59)

8 (26)

20 (54)

148 (70)

17 (89)

80 (82)

11 (41)

23 (74)

17 (46)

211 (100)

19 (100)

97 (100)

27 (100)

31 (100)

37 (100)

There are only a few companies with a turnover of more than 250 million € in the Nordic Countries. Only one Nordic company and one Eastern European company had raw material consumption of more than 100 000 m3. Figures 14 and 15 show more details about the turnover and raw material consumption of the companies in the five regions.

Figure 14: Regional consideration of the building companies’ turnover.

Report COST

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

37

Figure 15: Regional consideration of the building companies’ raw material consumption. Figure 16 shows the distribution of the specific use of timber in the five regions. The results of the survey might not be representative of the real situation in the different regions, because the responses were voluntary and depend on how the survey invitation was sent out in each country. The British Isles have the largest share of respondents dealing with specifying and/or buying timber as building material in a design office, compared to the other regions and their share of this category. Central Europe and the Mediterranean Countries follow after the British Isles with approximately half of the share in both. The Nordic Countries and Eastern Europe have the smallest shares. The share of roof-structure-making companies using trusses or timber beams/ rafters is largest in the Mediterranean Countries, closely followed by Central Europe. The British Isles and the Nordic Countries have the biggest share in using timber for construction walls. In a comparison of the regions, the Mediterranean Countries use more timber for construction floors, closely followed by the Nordic Countries. The share of companies using timber as interior material (including joinery and flooring) and for producing timber components for house builders (besides joinery) is largest in Eastern Europe. In the Nordic Countries, more companies use timber for concrete formwork/falsework or other temporary works, while there is none in the British Isles. Other use of timber, e.g. fencing, garden or other outdoor use, furniture production or pallets/packaging, has its biggest share among the Nordic respondents, followed by Central Europe.

Report COST

38

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

As the question allowed several answers, the total number of responses here was higher than the number of respondents in the respective regions, especially in the Nordic Countries. The total number of responses to this question is here approximately four times more than the number of responding companies. The reason for this might be evident, having in mind that the Nordic Countries are well known for prefabricated houses, where walls, floors and interior fittings, and in some cases even the roof structures, are built in integrated factories.

Figure 16: Regional consideration of the building companies’ specific use of timber (multiple answers possible). 3.1.2.2 Requirements and expectations The visible quality parameters of twist, spring and/or bow, discolouration or mould and visual defects (knots, cracks, wane, etc.), are considered as “most important” or “important” by about 50 % or more of the respondents in all five regions. Allowing for small differences, the share of respondents who consider spring and/or bow as most important (priority 1) is greatest in the Mediterranean Countries in a comparison with the other regions. Twist is mostly seen as important or most important in the Nordic Countries, followed by the British Isles and Central Europe. Eastern Europe stands out when considering discolouration or mould as “most important” and “important”, followed by the Mediterranean Countries. Concerning visual defects, Central Europe seems to have the largest share of respondents to consider the parameter as important, the largest share considering it as “most important” however, is found in the Mediterranean Countries. A regional comparison of the importance of these parameters is shown in Figure 17.

Report COST

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

39

Figure 17: Importance of visible quality parameters according to the building companies in different regions; 1 = most important, 6 = least important, NA = no answer. The mechanical quality parameters of stiffness, density, strength and strength class (grade) are most important for companies in the British Isles, followed by companies in the Mediterranean Countries. About 18 % of the respondents in Central Europe consider the strength of timber products as most important, whereas the strength class/grade is important or most important to 45 % of the Central European respondents. In a comparison of all four mechanical quality parameters, the density of timber products matters least in all five regions and strength classes (grades) matter most (Figure 18).

Report COST

40

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

Figure 18: Importance of mechanical quality parameters according to the building companies in different regions; 1 = most important, 6 = least important, NA = no answer. Moisture content is one of the most important quality parameters, certainly not least because it can have an influence on the above mentioned quality parameters. In the British Isles, 88 % of the companies give priority 1 or 2 to the moisture content, followed by 81 % of the respondents in Central Europe and 69 % in Eastern Europe, but only 53 % of the companies in the Nordic Countries. Of all five regions, companies in the Mediterranean Countries consider the moisture content as least important. Indeed, there are 18 % who say that the moisture content is least important (priority 6), compared with only 5 % and 4 % respectively in the Nordic Countries and in Eastern Europe and none in the British Isles and in Central Europe (Figure 19).

Report COST

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

41

A low price for the timber products ordered by the companies is mostly seen as important or even most important in the Nordic Countries, which is the only region with a share of priorities 1 and 2 more than 50 %. In Central Europe and in the Mediterranean Countries the price does not seem to matter very much (Figure 19).

Figure 19: Importance of moisture content and a low price according to the building companies in different regions; 1 = most important, 6 = least important, NA = no answer. 3.1.2.3 Customers’ satisfaction The British Isles and Central Europe, the two regions that considered the moisture content more important than the other regions, are least satisfied with the moisture content of the products they receive. Indeed, there are 27 % of the Central European respondents who are frequently not satisfied. Eastern European companies, which also considered the moisture content as important, are most satisfied with the received moisture content. Distortion, twist as well as spring/bow, was “important” or “most important” to all regions’ respondents. The respondents from Eastern Europe and from the British Isles are mostly satisfied. The Nordic Countries, which place great value especially on twist distortion but also on spring and bow distortion, are least satisfied with the quality of the received timber products, measured by distortion. In Central Europe there is no one who is frequently satisfied (choice 1) with distortion, colour, knots, and other defects; such as cracks, dimension, etc. Most satisfied with distortion are companies from Eastern Europe.

Report COST

42

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

Concerning colour, more or less all regions seem to be more frequently satisfied. Except for the Mediterranean Countries, all regions have a share of more than 50 % of respondents summed up in satisfaction choices 1 and 2. Knots belong to the visual defects, on which especially customers from Central and Eastern Europe and from the Mediterranean Countries place a greater value. These three regions are least satisfied with the quality of their timber products measured by knots. The Mediterranean Countries as well as Central Europe and the Nordic Countries are least satisfied with other quality parameters; such as cracks, dimension, density, strength, etc. But there was also a relatively large fraction in all regions that did not answer this question at all. According to Table 7 in the aggregated data for trading and building companies, most of the respondents had experienced timber rejected and sent back after a visual inspection, but on the whole, companies did agree that the timber industry is capable of delivering products that exactly meet the customers’ requirements. In the regional consideration, there was one exception. Despite that the companies from the British Isles belong to the more satisfied group regarding the quality parameters above, there were only 30 % that would “fully agree” or “agree” that the timber industry is capable of delivering products that exactly meet their requirements. On the other hand, regions that were not especially satisfied with the asked parameters, e.g. the Mediterranean Countries, would “agree” or “fully agree” that the timber industry is capable of delivering products according to their requirements. Figure 20 shows a detailed overview of customer satisfaction regarding different quality parameters and impressions of whether the timber industry is capable of meeting requirements.

Report COST

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

43

Figure 20: The building companies’ satisfaction with different quality parameters, in regional consideration; 1 = frequently satisfied, 6 = frequently not satisfied.

Report COST

44

3.1.3

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

Discussion regarding trading and building companies

The British Isles and the Nordic Countries were represented with more respondents that deal with building, construction and design than the other regions. As the Nordic Countries have a very high share of wood as a building material, this is not surprising. Traders are most represented in Central Europe and the Mediterranean Countries. The participating companies in the questionnaire are mostly small or medium in size, as measured by turnover and raw material consumption. The value creation in the companies ranges from low to high, but an examination based on the different kinds of products that customers deal with is not possible, as the fraction of companies that answered comprehensively in several categories is too large to be able to define special groups of customers. The visible quality parameters of twist distortion, spring and/or bow distortion, discolouration or mould and other visual defects; such as cracks, knots, wane, etc. are more evenly considered as important or most important than the mechanical quality parameters stiffness, density, strength and strength class (grade) when compared by region. The moisture content is one of the most important quality parameters, probably because of its influence on the other parameters. Most companies use a list of custom requirements that are part of the contract before ordering timber. Moreover, companies usually perform a visual inspection of the quality parameters of dimension, moisture content, number and size of knots, number and size of cracks and distortion. In general, this inspection is done manually. If the inspection is done by machine, it is usually directed to moisture content and perhaps dimension. The reason for that might be lack of knowledge about other methods for inspecting the timber products by machine. Another reason might be the costs of investment for mechanical inspection. A low price for ordered timber products in general is more or less “important” to trading companies as well as to building companies. The regional analysis of the building companies shows that especially companies from the Nordic Countries give high priority to price. In Central Europe and in the Mediterranean Countries, the companies do not value price as high as companies in the Nordic Countries. A reason for that could be the different types of house building systems in the different countries. The Nordic Countries for example have a high share of industrial timber construction, and there are many suppliers for prefabricated building systems. Therefore, the markets are very competitive. This type of production is also in a close context to production cost minimisation strategies. This leads to a stronger orientation toward price.

Report COST

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

45

According to the results of the survey, the quality requirements of the customers are not always met by the industry, and a certain level of dissatisfaction can be observed. However, the main part of the respondents would agree in that the timber industry is capable of delivering products that exactly meet customer requirements. From this, one might conclude that the actual dissatisfaction with different quality parameters does not play a particularly important role to the companies. It is possible that there was a misunderstanding in the question, where the respondents – because of given conditions – might have thought that the timber industry theoretically should be capable of delivering products that meet the requirements, where in reality the industry does not deliver the expected quality because of other reasons; such as, e.g., costs. If that should be the case, it suggests a need for further examination as to why the industry is doing so. Either the customers’ requirements are not clearly communicated to the industry, or the industry wants to save costs and effort because it expects the customers to accept the quality the industry delivers. Or there might be other reasons. A closer examination will follow when analysing the results of the producers’ questionnaires.

3.2 Secondary processing and integrated processing of softwood The next companies to be considered are those that work in secondary processing; see blue items in Figure 21. These can also be considered as (industrial) customers, as they buy their raw material – sawn timber – from primary processing industries for further processing into materials that are used by the end customers in the construction industry. In this analysis these companies will first and foremost be considered as producers. Other companies that work in the integrated processing are also considered, i.e. companies that produce their own sawn timber products and further process these; see orange items in Figure 21.

Sawmilling industry = primary processing

Further processing of sawn timber = secondary processing

Building, construction, designing with sawn timber products

Trading

Figure 21: Parts of value chain examined in this chapter. Report COST

46

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

The research statements of the Working Groups focus on producers’ views of quality aspects as well as on standards and techniques that are used in the processing of timber products. It is to be determined whether the producers’ quality requirements and standards match those of the customers’, and if techniques are used to meet the customers’ requirements. If both parties’ requirements match each other, both parties will be more content to cooperate and coordinate. This would aid wood quality acceptance and thereby strengthen the position of wood as a building material. Accordingly, topics to be discussed in this chapter are: a) The companies’ general view of wood quality b) Quality aspects connected to drying of timber products c) Quality control and standards d) Usage and standards of grading of timber products Scanning technologies are seldom used in both secondary and integrated processing. Only about 8 % of the secondary processing companies and 6 % of the integrated processing companies already use a scanning technique. About 7 % of integrated processing industries and about 4 % of secondary processing industries do not use any scanning technique but intend to do so in the future. The majority of both processing industries, however, does not use any scanning technique. But, the number of respondents who did not answer is high. Therefore, it is difficult to extract reliable results, and further analysis of the scanning topics will not be presented in the report. 3.2.1

Aggregated data for secondary and integrated processing of softwood

3.2.1.1 The companies and their general view of quality There were 99 companies in the survey that work only with softwood within secondary processing, or 60 % of all secondary processing companies and 13 % of all participating companies in the survey. Companies that work only with softwood within integrated processing totalled 127, or 58 % of all integrated processing companies and 16 % of all participating companies in the survey. In the processing industry, the size of companies seems to be more medium sized measured by their turnover. In both secondary and integrated processing, about 42 % have a turnover between 11 million € and 25 million €. This is followed by 29 % and 26 % of secondary and integrated processing companies respectively, who have a turnover between 2 million € and 10 million €. About 8 % of the companies in the integrated processing industry have a turnover of more than 250 million €. That is a twice as large a share as in the secondary processing industry. Figure 22 shows the turnover of companies in secondary processing and in integrated processing.

Report COST

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

47

Regarding the companies’ raw material consumption, it can be observed that the secondary processing industry is represented by small and medium sized companies. Here, 51 % of the companies consume up to 25 000 m3 of raw material, 32 % consume between 25 000 m3 and 100 000 m3. More than half of the integrated processing companies, more precisely 53 %, consume up to 25 000 m3 of raw material, but it is about 28 % that consume more than 100 000 m3 and 18 % that consume between 25 000 m3 and 100 000 m3. The raw material consumption of companies in secondary processing and in integrated processing is reported in Figure 22.

Figure 22: Turnover and raw material consumption of companies in secondary and integrated processing of softwood [% of respondents]. National raw material markets are among the most used in both secondary and integrated processing industries. About 56 % of the secondary processing companies buy their raw material on national markets. International markets are used by ca. 50 % of the companies. Regional markets hold the smallest share – 39 % of the companies. Integrated companies on the other hand, primarily use regional and national raw material markets – both have a share of approximately 50 %, with only one response more for the regional markets. 43 % of the integrated companies use international raw material markets. Companies normally do not use just one of the mentioned markets. So the total of the shares amounts to more than 100 %. For the detailed numbers of responses concerning raw material markets, see Table 15.

Report COST

48

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

Table 15: Raw material markets used by companies in secondary and integrated processing of softwood (multiple answers possible). Secondary processing of softwood Integrated processing of softwood Raw material markets [n (%)] [n (%)] Regional markets 39 (39.4) 64 (50.4) National markets 56 (56.6) 63 (49.6) International markets 50 (50.5) 55 (43.3) No answer 0 (0) 0 (0) Settlement of rounding difference [%] 0 0 Total 145 (146.5) 182 (143.3)

Species of timber used by the companies are mainly Norway spruce/fir (whitewood) and Scots pine (redwood) in secondary and in integrated processing. Despite statements in the beginning of the questionnaire that only softwood is processed, there are some companies that stated in a question about the used species that they use hardwood species. The share is 6 % in secondary processing and approximately 4 % in integrated processing. The share of hardwood used is probably negligible, so it may be counted in the softwood processing industry. Most companies use more than just one species. Thus, the total number of responses in the question is higher than the number of companies. Having a difference of + 72 %, the integrated processing industry clearly tends more to use several species than the secondary industry, which shows a difference of + 39 %. See Table 16 for the distribution of species which are used by the industry. Table 16: Species of timber being processed by companies in secondary and integrated processing of softwood (multiple answers possible). Species of timber being processed Norway spruce/fir (whitewood) Scots pine (redwood) Sitka spruce Other softwoods (conifer species) Hardwood species No answer

Secondary processing of Integrated processing of softwood [n (%)] softwood [n (%)] 47 (47.5) 78 (61.4) 30 (30.3) 64 (50.4) 1 (1.0) 9 (7.1) 14 (14.1) 34 (26.8) 6 (6.1) 5 (3.9) 40 (40.4) 28 (22.0)

Settlement of rounding difference [%] Total

0 138 (139.4)

Report COST

0.1 218 (171.7)

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

49

The building industry sector, which also includes structural building components, is considered among the four most important customers of secondary as well as of integrated processing companies. It is followed by the industry segment for structural timber components; such as roof trusses, floors and walls and then by agents and timber trading companies. Both processing industries count the furniture industry as most seldom among their four important customers. Producers of engineered wood products and the sector for other components; such as windows, doors and flooring are also among the customers who are counted less often as one of the four most important. A comparison between secondary and integrated processing shows that more integrated processing companies tend to have these as important customers than companies in secondary processing. The specification of other customers shows that there is a substantial part of secondary as well as of integrated companies that have important customers in the packaging and pallets industry, in fencing and garden/agricultural use and in trading with building material through do-it-yourself-stores. Other examples are food and chemistry industry or one coffin producer. Figure 23 shows the companies’ top four important customers and a ranking of these.

Report COST

50

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

Figure 23: Top four important customer groups in secondary and integrated processing of softwood (upper part, [% of respondents]) and a ranking of these (lower part). Asked for their agreement with some suggested statements, nearly half of the companies in secondary processing as well as in integrated processing disagreed in the suggestion that a strict quality control is not feasible. Expressed in a positive way, this would mean that nearly 50 % see possibilities for strict quality control, and it is indicating that these companies also are willing to apply it. About 20 % in both the secondary and the integrated industry would not see strict quality control feasible, and ca. 30 % stay more or less neutral to this statement.

Report COST

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

51

About 40 % of the integrated processing companies also consider it easy to define and control quality. The share of the companies in the secondary processing industry that agree is only about 30 %. Secondary processing industries seem to stay more neutral on this question, with a more or less neutral answer in ca. 50 % of the responses. About 20 % in both secondary and integrated processing do not see strict quality control feasible, and about 20 % also would not say that quality is easy to define and control. See Figure 24 for an overview of the opinions concerning these statements.

Figure 24: Secondary and integrated softwood processing companies’ rating of statements concerning quality and quality control [% of respondents]. The chapter on trading and building companies showed that the customers’ requirements are not always met by the industry, even if the customers consider the industry capable of delivering the expected quality. It was supposed that one reason for the contradictory dissatisfaction of the customers could be the costs of quality control in the industry. The industry was asked to rate the statement, that “strict quality control is too expensive” and that “customers must accept a certain level of non-conformity”. The results are fairly evenly distributed as one can see in Figure 25. But the tendency is that more companies, about 40 % in secondary and integrated processing industries, do not agree. Approximately one third also would judge the costs of quality control as a cause of non-conformity in the quality of delivered products.

Report COST

52

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

Another reason assumed in the chapter on trading and building with timber products is that producers might consider themselves in a dominant position, including in the determination of quality. The companies in the processing industry were asked to express their view on a producer-driven timber market as a reason for customers having to accept what is offered by producers. As one can see in Figure 25, clearly the greatest part of integrated processing industries, about 61 %, would deny that. Nearly 30 % of the secondary processing industries would argue that in a producer-driven timber market customers have to accept the quality they receive. Also in the secondary processing industry, most companies disagree with this statement, at about 44 %.

Figure 25: Secondary and integrated softwood processing companies’ rating of statements concerning producer and market related reasons for dissatisfying quality [% of respondents]. More than half of the companies in the integrated industry and about 45 % of the companies in the secondary processing industry consider the fact that wood is a natural product as reason for some quality defects and shortcomings, which the customers have to accept. Approximately one third of the respondents in secondary and integrated processing were more or less neutral to this statement. Only 20 % of the companies did not agree. See Figure 26 for an overview of the companies’ rating of this statement.

Report COST

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

53

Figure 26: Secondary and integrated softwood processing companies’ rating of statements concerning product related reasons for dissatisfying quality [% of respondents]. 3.2.1.2 The companies’ experience with drying related quality aspects The moisture content is one of the most important parameters when defining the quality of timber products. When specifying the moisture content in contracts, most companies in the secondary as well as in the integrated processing industry use a plus/minus interval, e.g. 16 % ± 4 %, or the moisture content is specified as a range, e.g. 12 % - 20 %. A statistical approach is used by smaller groups in both the secondary processing industry and the integrated processing industry. Some companies also use other systems; such as specifying maximum moisture content, and some companies even use more than just one of the given systems. Table 17 shows the details in the number of responses for the different systems of specifying the moisture content. Table 17: Systems for specifying the moisture content in contracts used by companies in secondary and integrated processing of softwood (multiple answers possible). System used for specifying moisture content in contracts Plus/minus interval Range Statistical approach Other No answer Settlement of rounding difference [%] Total

Secondary processing of softwood Integrated processing of softwood [n (%)] [n (%)] 45 (45.5) 53 (41.7) 19 (19.2) 33 (26.0) 10 (10.1) 21 (16.5) 14 (14.1) 13 (10.2) 15 (15.2) 10 (7.9) -0.1 103 (104)

Report COST

0.1 130 (102.4)

54

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

Nearly three quarters of the companies in secondary processing and more than three quarters of those in integrated processing use the traditional method of a resistance or conductance type electrical moisture meter when measuring the moisture content. Other methods; such as capacitance moisture meter and gravimetric measurement, are lesser used. About 10 % of the integrated processing companies do not normally measure the moisture content. It can be assumed that this is a reference to companies producing lesser valued timber products, where the quality does not matter. The share in secondary processing amounts to 13 %. Also here, several methods of measurement can be used by one company. For details, see Table 18. Table 18: Methods for measurement of moisture content used by companies in secondary and integrated processing of softwood (multiple answers possible). Measurement of moisture content Normally not Gravimetric Resistance/conductance Capacitance No answer Settlement of rounding difference [%] Total

Secondary processing of Integrated processing of softwood [n (%)] softwood [n (%)] 13 (13.1) 12 (9.4) 16 (16.2) 21 (16.5) 71 (71.7) 99 (78.0) 18 (18.2) 17 (13.4) 9 (9.1) 7 (5.5) 0 127 (128.3)

0 156 (122.8)

Table 19 shows that approximately two thirds of the companies in secondary processing as well as in integrated production do not specify an allowable degree of case hardening/moisture content gradients. Nearly half of the secondary processsing industries and more than half of the integrated processing industries definitively do not specify this. Approximately 15 % and 11 % definitively do not have enough knowledge about this quality aspect. Table 19: Specification of case hardening degree in secondary and integrated processing of softwood. Allowable degree of case hardening/MC gradients Yes No Might do, if benefits were known No answer

Secondary processing of Integrated processing of softwood [n (%)] softwood [n (%)] 12 (12.1) 22 (17.3) 49 (49.5) 71 (55.9) 15 (15.2) 23 (23.2)

14 (11.0) 20 (15.7)

0 99 (100)

0.1 127 (100)

Settlement of rounding difference [%] Total

Report COST

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

55

Quality control is being applied in most companies. In two thirds of the secondary processing companies and in three quarters of the integrated processing companies the quality is inspected visually. About 43 % of secondary processing industries and nearly half of integrated processing industries measure the quality randomly. Measurements of all dried timber and a statistical evaluation of measurements is lesser used in the processing industry. Many companies apparently use several of the named schemes. It thus suggests that it is mostly companies that perform a visual inspection that also perform random sampling and measurement. Companies that routinely measure all dried timber would surely not waste time on visual inspection. Table 20 shows a detailed view of the used schemes for quality control. Table 20: Schemes of quality control used by companies in secondary and integrated processing of softwood (multiple answers possible). Secondary processing of Integrated processing of Used schemes of quality control softwood [n (%)] softwood [n (%)] None 4 (4.0) 4 (3.1) Visual inspection 66 (66.7) 95 (74.8) Random sampling and measurements 43 (43.4) 61 (48.0) Measurements of all dried timber 19 (19.2) 22 (17.3) Statistical evaluation of measurements 13 (13.1) 16 (12.6) No answer 20 (20.2) 15 (11.8) Settlement of rounding difference [%] Total

0.1 165 (166.7)

0.1 213 (167.7)

More than three quarters of the companies in the secondary processing industry did not use limits regarding distortion in quality control, did not know or did not answer regarding twist distortion as well as bow and spring distortion and cup deformation. The share of these companies in the integrated processing industry is approximately two thirds regarding twist, bow and spring distortion and about three quarters regarding cup deformation. For the shares of companies that specify acceptable limits regarding distortion, see Figure 27.

Report COST

56

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

Figure 27: Acceptable limits regarding distortion/deformation in the quality control of companies in secondary and integrated processing of softwood [% of respondents].

Report COST

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

57

All of the four types of distortion/deformation – twist, bow, spring and cup – were more seldom found by companies in the secondary and integrated processing industry regarding their own products. The fewest companies in both secondary and integrated processing find these deformations often or very often. But integrated processing industries found these deformations more often than secondary processing industries. Cup deformation is most found of all types of deformation, followed by twist distortion and then by bow and spring distortion. In Figure 28, the frequencies of found distortions and deformations are reported. There were a substantial number of companies that did not answer. The reasons are not known, but at best it can be assumed that they do not experience the respective defects at all in their products.

Figure 28: Frequency of different types of distortion/deformation occurring in secondary and integrated production of softwood products [% of respondents]. Report COST

58

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

There can be different causes for the above-listed types of deformation and distortion. What the industries claim as causes for deformation and distortion can be seen in Figure 29. The most cited causes for twist distortion are over drying, poor stickering, poor wood quality in general and a too big extent of compression wood. Improper storage and sawn timber from small diameter logs are claimed as causes for twist distortion by the fewest number of companies. For bow distortion, several causes are claimed by the respondents, but most of all, poor stickering and a too big extent of compression wood are claimed. Sawn timber from small diameter logs as a cause for bow distortion is claimed least by both secondary and integrated processing industries. Spring distortion and cup deformation are those for which companies are least certain of the causes. The extent of compression wood, poor wood quality in general and over drying is mostly seen as causes for spring distortion in both secondary and integrated processing. Cup deformation is clearly caused by over drying, according to the industry. Here, as well as in Figure 27, the large number of no-answers makes it difficult to interpret the results because there are several possible reasons for them. The number is not the same for all types of deformation. Therefore, it cannot be assumed that the companies did not answer the whole question at all, but rather do not experience some of the named defects. Or it could be assumed that their knowledge about the defects is insufficient.

Report COST

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

59

Figure 29: Causes for distortion/deformation according to the secondary and integrated softwood processing industry (multiple answers possible) [% of respondents]. If companies experience quality problems regarding colour, they usually contact the kiln manufacturer, colleagues in neighbouring companies and research institutes or universities. But among the different types of processing industries there are differences as to which of these they contact most. Secondary processing companies mostly contact research institutes or universities, followed by the kiln manufacturer and then colleagues in other companies. Integrated processing companies mostly contact colleagues in other companies, followed by the kiln manufacturer and then research institutes or universities (Table 21).

Report COST

60

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

Table 21: Companies’ contacts when experiencing problems regarding colour in secondary and integrated processing softwood industry (multiple answers possible). Contact for assistance in problems with respect to colour Kiln manufacturer Colleague in neighbouring company Private consultant Research institute/University Trade/industry association I don't speak to other people about my problems No answer

Secondary processing of Integrated processing of softwood [n (%)] softwood [n (%)] 13 (13.1) 30 (23.6) 11 (11.1) 36 (28.3) 2 (2.0) 13 (10.2) 16 (16.2) 24 (18.9) 7 (7.1) 23 (18.1)

Settlement of rounding difference [%] Total

7 (7.1) 58 (58.6)

11 (8.7) 44 (34.6)

0 114 (115.2)

0.1 181 (142.5)

Most companies in both secondary and integrated processing industries seldom experience claims by customers that are caused by discolouration, or they do not experience it or do not want to admit it, as they did not answer. If there are claims caused by discolouration, it mostly is caused by blue stain, surface mould and some sticker staining. Other discolouration as cause for claims named in Figure 30 are, e.g., too dark colour caused by too long storage before drying or light red decay in secondary processing. In integrated processing it is also light red decay, sun marked ends of the boards and discolouration caused by the bark in the watering phase before processing.

Report COST

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

61

Figure 30: Discolouration causing claims from customers to secondary and integrated processing companies [% of respondents]. In general, the companies in secondary and in integrated processing are more or less satisfied with the quality of their products. The surveyed quality parameters were moisture content, distortion, colour, knots and other defects. Dissatisfaction is mostly caused by knots and other defects, while satisfaction is mostly grounded on moisture content, distortion and colour. More respondents in the integrated production than in the processing industry are frequently or often satisfied with all of the named quality parameters. An overview of the frequency of the companies’ satisfaction regarding these quality parameters, is given in Figure 31.

Report COST

62

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

Secondary processing [n (%)]

Integrated processing [n (%)]

Secondary processing [n (%)]

Integrated processing [n (%)]

1

20 (20.2)

30 (23.6)

1

13 (13.1)

13 (10.2)

2

38 (38.4)

56 (44.1)

2

32 (32.3)

56 (44.1)

3

17 (17.2)

19 (15.0)

3

23 (23.2)

33 (26.0)

4

7 (7.1)

10 (7.9)

4

10 (10.1)

10 (7.9)

5

5 (5.1)

4 (3.1)

5

10 (10.1)

6 (4.7)

6

4 (4.0)

1 (0.8)

6

1 (1.0)

1 (0.8)

NA

8 (8.1)

7 (5.5)

NA

10 (10.1)

8 (6.3)

SRD

-0.1

0

SRD

0.1

0

Total

99 (100)

127 (100)

Total

99 (100)

127 (100)

Moisture content Secondary processing [n (%)]

Distortion

Integrated processing [n (%)]

Secondary processing [n (%)]

Integrated processing [n (%)]

1

27 (27.3)

30 (23.6)

1

12 (12.1)

14 (11.0)

2

32 (32.3)

59 (46.5)

2

23 (23.2)

44 (34.6)

3

13 (13.1)

23 (18.1)

3

27 (27.3)

40 (31.5)

4

13 (13.1)

4 (3.1)

4

16 (16.2)

12 (9.4)

5

5 (5.1)

2 (1.6)

5

10 (10.1)

8 (6.3)

6

0 (0)

2 (1.6)

6

2 (2.0)

3 (2.4)

NA

9 (9.1)

7 (5.5)

NA

9 (9.1)

6 (4.7)

SRD

0

0

SRD

0

0.1

Total

99 (100)

127 (100)

Total

99 (100)

127 (100)

Colour

Secondary processing [n (%)]

Integrated processing [n (%)]

1

9 (9.1)

8 (6.3)

2

24 (24.2)

50 (39.4)

3

26 (26.3)

48 (37.8)

4

19 (19.2)

7 (5.5)

5

8 (8.1)

2 (1.6)

6

0 (0)

3 (2.4)

NA

13 (13.1)

9 (7.1)

SRD

0

-0.1

Total

99 (100)

127 (100)

Other defects

Knots

1 = frequently satisfied 6 = frequently not satisfied NA = no answer SRD = settlement of rounding difference [%]

Figure 31: Companies’ satisfaction regarding different quality parameters in the secondary and integrated processing of softwood. 3.2.1.3 The companies’ usage of grading standards and technology This part of the questionnaire had many missing answers. The reason for that is not known. A reliable evaluation of the data regarding grading is therefore difficult, if not impossible. The most logical reason for not answering a question is that the question cannot be applied to the respondent. If this reason is assumed for all Report COST

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

63

missing answers, the results of the survey show that all types of strength grading are seldom used in secondary as well as in integrated processing industries. If companies do perform strength grading, visual grading by eye is most common. Almost 20 % of integrated processing companies and about 12 % of secondary processing companies grade more than 50 % of their sawn timber products visually by eye. See Figure 32 for the distribution of types of grading used in the industry.

Figure 32: Types of strength grading used in secondary and integrated processing of softwood [% of respondents]. In the classification of the shares of graded sawn timber in Figure 32, it is not possible to distinguish whether companies that answer 0-5 % in all types of grading do not apply grading of their timber, or just for a very small part of it. The shares of machine strength grading are more or less evenly distributed among integrated processing companies that use this type of grading for 10 % to more than 50 % of their sawn timber products, with the exception of those who grade ca. 40 % of their products. This share is less than half of the others. Secondary processing companies that perform machine strength grading usually do that for 10 % of their production or for more than 50 %. Consistent with the impression of the usage of machine strength grading in Figure 32, most companies did not answer when asked about machine types used. If machine strength grading is applied, most companies use vibration machines, followed by bending machines. There are only a few companies that use X-ray machines, and other machines or combinations of X-ray and the traditional machines are used occasionally (Table 22). The other machine named by one company in integrated processing is a Fin Scan machine. Report COST

64

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

Table 22: Machines for strength grading used in secondary and integrated processing of softwood (multiple answers possible). Machines used for machine strength grading Bending machine Vibration machine X-ray machine X-ray & bending X-ray & vibration Other No answer

Secondary processing of Integrated processing of softwood [n (%)] softwood [n (%)] 4 (4.0) 10 (7.9) 7 (7.1) 15 (11.8) 4 (4.0) 4 (3.1) 0 (0) 1 (0.8) 2 (2.0) 2 (1.6) 0 (0) 1 (0.8) 85 (85.9) 101 (79.5)

Settlement of rounding difference [%] Total

0 102 (103)

0 134 (105.5)

Strength classes that are produced by machine strength grading are mainly those equal to and between C30 and C24 in both secondary and integrated processing industries. Classes higher than C30 are produced more often in secondary than in integrated processing industries. If the timber is graded visually, most companies in the secondary processing industry produce strength classes higher than C24, while integrated processing companies usually produce strength classes lower than or equal to C24. Glulam grades are produced more often by secondary processing industries than by integrated processing industries. A detailed overview of the produced strength classes can be found in Tables 23 and 24. Table 23: Strength grades produced by machine strength grading in secondary and integrated processing of softwood (multiple answers possible). Machine strength grading Higher than C30

Secondary processing of Integrated processing of softwood [n (%)] softwood [n (%)] 6 (6.1) 2 (1.6)

Equal and between C30 and C24 Lower than C24 Glulam grades

9 (9.1) 4 (4.0) 6 (6.1)

20 (15.7) 12 (9.4) 5 (3.9)

9 (9.1) 74 (74.7)

21 (16.5) 81 (63.8)

0 108 (109.1)

0.1 141 (111)

Don't machine strength grade softwood No answer Settlement of rounding difference [%] Total

Report COST

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

65

Table 24: Strength grades produced by visual strength grading in secondary and integrated processing of softwood (multiple answers possible). Visual strength grading Higher than C20 Lower or equal to C20 Glulam grades Higher than C24 Lower or equal to C24

Secondary processing of Integrated processing of softwood [n (%)] softwood [n (%)] 6 (6.1) 10 (7.9) 2 (2.0) 6 (4.7) 1 (1.0) 0 (0) 9 (9.1) 12 (9.4) 6 (6.1) 22 (17.3)

Glulam grades (LS, LD, L-grades)

5 (5.1)

4 (3.1)

8 (8.1) 68 (68.7)

24 (18.9) 64 (50.4)

-0.1 105 (106.1)

0.1 142 (111.8)

Don't visual strength grade softwood No answer Settlement of rounding difference [%] Total

According to the results of the survey, CE-marking on products is not common in the processing industry. A higher tendency to use CE-marking is found in the integrated processing industry. Here, 30 % apply it, compared to 15 % in the secondary processing industry. Nearly 30 % of the secondary processing companies do not apply CE-marking and more than a half did not answer the question. For the integrated processing industry, about 40 % do not apply CE-marking and nearly 30 % did not answer. This impression is also reflected when companies rate a statement about the possibilities of “certification by the means of the CE-label” to “provide more guarantee for reliability of timber products”. About 16 % in secondary processing industries and 35 % in integrated processing industry would see these possibilities, and presumptively these companies are mainly those that already apply CE-marking of their products. See Figure 33 for the overview of companies rating this statement.

Report COST

66

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

Figure 33: Secondary and integrated softwood processing companies’ rating of statement on CE-certification of timber products [% of respondents]. According to Table 25, for companies performing machine strength grading, up to a quarter of the total rejects are due to visual override criteria. Table 25: Share of total rejects caused by visual override in machine strength grading in secondary and integrated processing of softwood. Share of total rejects 0-25 % 26-50 % 51-75 % 76-100 % No answer

Secondary processing of Integrated processing of softwood [n (%)] softwood [n (%)] 15 (15.2) 36 (28.3) 4 (4.0) 9 (7.1) 1 (1.0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 4 (3.1) 79 (79.8) 78 (61.4)

Settlement of rounding difference [%] Total

0 99 (100)

0.1 127 (100)

According to Figure 34, knots, cracks and rot/decay/stain are the three quality parameters that most often lead to rejection or downgrading upon visual grading in both processing industries.

Report COST

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

67

Secondary processing of softwood Integrated processing of softwood 1 = frequently 6 = infrequently NA = no answer

Figure 34: Frequency of knots, cracks and rot as causes for rejection/downgrading in visual grading in secondary and integrated processing of softwood [% of respondents]. Distortion and wane are defects that frequently lead to rejection or downgrading upon visual grading in the integrated processing industry. In the secondary processing industry, these defects sometimes also lead to rejection/downgrading (Figure 35).

Report COST

68

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

Secondary processing of softwood

1 = frequently, 6 = infrequently

Integrated processing of softwood

NA = no answer

Figure 35: Frequency of distortion and wane as causes for rejection/downgrading in visual grading in secondary and integrated processing of softwood [% of respondents]. The extent of compression wood occasionally causes rejection and downgrading in secondary processing industries as well as in integrated processing industries. But the share of nearly 30 % in the integrated processing industry is approximately twice as great as the share in the secondary processing industry (Figure 36). Secondary processing of softwood Integrated processing of softwood 1 = frequently 6 = infrequently NA = no answer

Figure 36: Frequency of compression wood as cause for rejection/downgrading in visual grading in secondary and integrated processing of softwood [% of respondents]. As seen in Figure 37, the width of growth rings and the slope of grain cause occasional rejection/downgrading in secondary and integrated processing industries. The slope of grain has a relatively high number of non-respondents – up to three quarters – compared to a maximum of two thirds for the other parameters. The Report COST

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

69

reason for this is likely that the slope of grain had not been included in all languages of questionnaires, due to unfortunate circumstances during the preparation of the questionnaires.

Secondary processing of softwood

1 = frequently, 6 = infrequently

Integrated processing of softwood

NA = no answer

Figure 37: Frequency of growth ring width and slope of grain as causes for rejection/downgrading in visual grading in secondary and integrated processing of softwood [% of respondents]. Dimensions cause rejection for the largest portion of the secondary processing companies. In the integrated processing industry, the portions of companies that frequently and those that infrequently experience dimension as a cause for rejection/downgrading are nearly evenly divided: 24 % experience it frequently, 25 % infrequently (Figure 38). Secondary processing of softwood Integrated processing of softwood 1 = frequently 6 = infrequently NA = no answer

Figure 38: Frequency of dimensions as causes for rejection/downgrading in visual grading in secondary and integrated processing of softwood [% of respondents]. Report COST

70

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

Other defects causing rejection or downgrading in visual grading are occasionally found; then mostly in the integrated processing industry. Other defects named in secondary as well as in integrated processing industries are defects caused by insects. In a general view about strength grading of structural timber, most companies in secondary as well as in integrated processing industry would see a need for improved strength grading of structural timber. Especially companies in the integrated processing industry seem to be interested in this, not least because the share of non-answering companies is relatively small with 35 %, compared to the secondary processing industry where about 62 % did not answer (Table 26). In fact, one can assume that companies in secondary processing generally are less interested in strength grading, grading technology and improvement than companies in integrated processing. This is assumed due to the fact that the share of non-answering companies in all of the following statements, which should be rated by the companies, is about 60-70 % of the secondary processing companies, compared to about 30-50 % in the integrated processing industry. Table 26: Secondary and integrated softwood processing companies’ rating of statement regarding strength grading of structural timber. Strength grading of structural timber has to be improved in general

1 = fully agree, 6 = fully disagree 1 2 3 4 5 6 NA

Secondary processing Integrated processing of softwood [n (%)] of softwood [n (%)] 10 (10.1) 15 (11.8) 9 (9.1) 20 (15.7) 9 (9.1) 16 (12.6) 4 (4.0) 12 (9.4) 3 (3.0) 15 (11.8) 2 (2.0) 4 (3.1) 62 (62.6) 45 (35.4)

Settlement of rounding difference [%] Total

0.1 99 (100)

0.2 127 (100)

Although there are fewer companies using machine strength grading, but more using visual strength grading, a larger number of the companies would agree with the statement that visual strength grading will be less important in the future. As seen in Table 27, there is also a substantial number of companies in the integrated processing industry, about 20 % compared to 10 % in secondary processing, which would not agree with this statement.

Report COST

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

71

Table 27: Secondary and integrated softwood processing companies’ rating of statement regarding the future importance of visual strength grading. Visual strength grading will be less important in 1 = fully agree, the future 6 = fully disagree 1 2 3 4 5 6 NA

Secondary processing Integrated processing of softwood [n (%)] of softwood [n (%)] 6 (6.1) 17 (13.4) 7 (7.1) 18 (14.2) 5 (5.1) 11 (8.7) 5 (5.1) 6 (4.7) 4 (4.0) 14 (11.0) 6 (6.1) 13 (10.2) 66 (66.7) 48 (37.8)

Settlement of rounding difference [%] Total

-0.2 99 (100)

0 127 (100)

A demand for strength grades higher than C30 is seen more by companies in the secondary processing industry. As seen before, there are also more secondary processing companies than integrated processing companies producing higher strength classes. The largest portion of the integrated processing industries stays neutral to this statement, as one can see in Table 28. Table 28: Secondary and integrated softwood processing companies’ rating of statement regarding the demand for high strength classes. There is a demand for high strength grades (over C30)

1 = fully agree, 6 = fully disagree 1 2 3 4 5 6 NA

Secondary processing Integrated processing of softwood [n (%)] of softwood [n (%)] 9 (9.1) 6 (4.7) 7 (7.1) 13 (10.2) 7 (7.1) 22 (17.3) 3 (3.0) 12 (9.4) 7 (7.1) 10 (7.9) 4 (4.0) 15 (11.8) 62 (62.6) 49 (38.6)

Settlement of rounding difference [%] Total

0 99 (100)

0.1 127 (100)

Most of the answering respondents in secondary and integrated processing stay neutral to the statement that “output control is a good alternative to strength grading according to fixed machine settings”. Even here, the number of companies in the integrated processing industry that would agree with the statement, is greater than in the secondary processing industry (Table 29). Report COST

72

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

Table 29: Secondary and integrated softwood processing companies’ rating of statement regarding output control versus fixed machine settings in strength grading. Output control is a good alternative to strength grading according to 1 = fully agree, fixed machine settings 6 = fully disagree 1 2 3 4 5 6 NA

Secondary processing Integrated processing of softwood [n (%)] of softwood [n (%)] 5 (5.1) 7 (5.5) 3 (3.0) 15 (11.8) 10 (10.1) 16 (12.6) 4 (4.0) 17 (13.4) 3 (3.0) 4 (3.1) 2 (2.0) 7 (5.5) 72 (72.7) 61 (48.0)

Settlement of rounding difference [%] Total

0.1 99 (100)

0.1 127 (100)

The highest share of secondary as well as of integrated processing industries would expect the “utilisation of timber and engineered timber products enhanced by more effective machine grading procedures” (Table 30), although the greater part of all companies do not use machine strength grading. Table 30: Secondary and integrated softwood processing companies’ rating of statement regarding the correlation of the utilisation of timber products and the effectiveness of machine grading procedures. Utilisation of timber and engineered timber products would be enhanced by more effective machine grading procedures

1 = fully agree, 6 = fully disagree 1 2 3 4 5 6 NA

Secondary processing Integrated processing of softwood [n (%)] of softwood [n (%)] 11 (11.1) 14 (11.0) 8 (8.1) 25 (19.7) 10 (10.1) 18 (14.2) 6 (6.1) 13 (10.2) 1 (1.0) 9 (7.1) 2 (2.0) 3 (2.4) 61 (61.6) 45 (35.4)

Settlement of rounding difference [%] Total

0 99 (100)

Report COST

0 127 (100)

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

73

About 27 % of the integrated processing industries consider it “more important to be able to grade timber from a large geographical area in the same grader settings than have optimised settings for timber from specific regions.” This is the largest share in the integrated processing industry. The largest share of secondary processing industries considers the same, but this share is here nearly equal with those companies that stay neutral on the question (Table 31). Those companies that agree with this statement appear to be those that buy their raw material from national and international markets. As seen in Table 15, the largest share of integrated processing industries buy the material from regional and national markets. Regional operating companies are often small companies that normally do not invest in advanced machinery. Therefore, the companies that answer positively to the statement in Table 31 must be those that buy the raw material from national markets. Table 31: Secondary and integrated softwood processing companies’ rating of statement regarding machine settings for timber from different regions. It is more important to be able to grade timber from a large geographical area on the same grader settings than have optimised settings for timber from specific regions

1 = fully agree, 6 = fully disagree 1 2 3 4 5 6 NA

Secondary processing Integrated processing of softwood [n (%)] of softwood [n (%)] 4 (4.0) 17 (13.4) 9 (9.1) 18 (14.2) 7 (7.1) 13 (10.2) 5 (5.1) 10 (7.9) 5 (5.1) 6 (4.7) 4 (4.0) 10 (7.9) 65 (65.7) 53 (41.7)

Settlement of rounding difference [%] Total

-0.1 99 (100)

0 127 (100)

For the main part of both secondary and integrated processing industries, it is quite “important to have machine settings for a large number of grades and combinations available for use”, (Table 32), and it also is quite desirable for them “to always have the same setting for a strength grade whatever combinations are being graded” (Table 33). The integrated processing industries are particularly interested in this, and the rate of multiple productions of strength grades by machine was also bigger than in the secondary processing industry (Table 23). Report COST

74

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

Table 32: Secondary and integrated softwood processing companies’ rating of statement regarding machine settings for different number of grades. It is important to have machine settings for a large number of grades and combinations available for use

1 = fully agree, 6 = fully disagree 1 2 3 4 5 6 NA

Secondary processing Integrated processing of softwood [n (%)] of softwood [n (%)] 7 (7.1) 10 (7.9) 6 (6.1) 21 (16.5) 8 (8.1) 13 (10.2) 4 (4.0) 11 (8.7) 0 (0) 8 (6.3) 3 (3.0) 6 (4.7) 71 (71.7) 58 (45.7)

Settlement of rounding difference [%] Total

0 99 (100)

0 127 (100)

Table 33: Secondary and integrated softwood processing companies’ rating of statement regarding machine settings for strength grades. It is desirable to always have the same setting for a strength grade, whatever combinations are being graded

1 = fully agree, 6 = fully disagree 1 2 3 4 5 6 NA

Secondary processing Integrated processing of softwood [n (%)] of softwood [n (%)] 6 (6.1) 12 (9.4) 3 (3.0) 15 (11.8) 9 (9.1) 13 (10.2) 4 (4.0) 12 (9.4) 3 (3.0) 4 (3.1) 3 (3.0) 10 (7.9) 71 (71.7) 61 (48.0)

Settlement of rounding difference [%] Total

0.1 99 (100)

0.2 127 (100)

“Machine strength grading of green timber needs to be developed” is confirmed mostly by companies in the integrated processing industry. These companies also use green timber, while secondary processing industries usually receive dried timber. 28 % of the integrated processing companies and 13 % of secondary processing companies confirm this statement. The share of secondary processing industries that stay neutral to the statement is even with that of companies that confirm it (Table 34). Report COST

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

75

Table 34: Secondary and integrated softwood processing companies’ rating of statement regarding machine strength grading for green timber. Machine strength grading of green timber needs to be developed

1 = fully agree, 6 = fully disagree 1 2 3 4 5 6 NA

Secondary processing Integrated processing of softwood [n (%)] of softwood [n (%)] 7 (7.1) 25 (19.7) 6 (6.1) 10 (7.9) 6 (6.1) 15 (11.8) 7 (7.1) 9 (7.1) 1 (1.0) 5 (3.9) 3 (3.0) 7 (5.5) 69 (69.7) 56 (44.1)

Settlement of rounding difference [%] Total

3.2.2

-0.1 99 (100)

0 127 (100)

Discussion regarding secondary processing and integrated processing of softwood

Producers are generally willing to meet the customers’ requirements. Reasons for contradictory dissatisfaction of customers can be the industry’s costs for strict quality control or a producer-driven timber market where the quality is defined and declared by the producers. But it is more likely that wood as a natural material is connected to inhomogeneity that leads to variance and deviation of the quality standards and thereby to customers’ dissatisfaction. The secondary processing industry, more than the integrated processing industry, tends more to deny that wood as a natural product implies a certain level of non-conformity with the quality definitions. The results from the part of the questionnaire regarding moisture content and drying quality show that processing companies are generally satisfied with the drying quality of their products. But the smallest number of companies measure all dried timber. Accordingly, most of the companies in secondary and integrated processing do not specify acceptable limits in quality control regarding distortion or an allowable degree of case hardening. A visual inspection or random sampling and measurement would hardly be sufficient to comply with these limits. The part of the questionnaire regarding grading of timber products had a lot of missing answers, and therefore the results are not especially reliable. According to the results, grading (visual grading, visual grading assisted by scanning, machine grading) is seldom applied in the industry. If it is applied, visual grading is most common. Least common is visual grading by eye assisted by any scanning technology. The most frequently responding companies work within integrated processing. Report COST

76

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

A greater portion of the companies in both secondary and integrated processing states that visual strength grading will be less important in the future. They expect that the technology will change or improve. But the question still remains whether they are willing to take part in this improvement. Even if there are not many companies that produce high strength classes, a demand for higher classes is noticed. A reason for that might be the companies’ awareness of the trend towards higher performance structures. The part of the questionnaire regarding scanning techniques over and above machine strength grading was seldom answered by the respondents. The most logical conclusion would be that scanning techniques are seldom used in the processing industries. Also, the tendency to begin use of scanning techniques is very low. But here too, the results are very unreliable, as the reasons for not answering are not known.

3.3 Primary processing of softwood In this chapter respondents in primary processing are presented. These companies sell the raw material sawn timber directly or via traders to further processing industries and to the customers in building, construction and design; see blue items in Figure 39. Also here, only those companies are considered that work only with softwood.

Sawmilling industry = primary processing

Further processing of sawn timber = secondary processing

Building, construction, designing with sawn timber products

Trading

Figure 39: Parts of value chain examined in this chapter.

Report COST

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

77

The questionnaire is identical to the one for the secondary processing industry, and the topics to be examined in this chapter are the same as in the previous chapter: a) The companies’ general view of wood quality b) Quality aspects connected to drying of timber products c) Quality control and standards d) Usage and standards of grading of timber products Of all producers, the primary processing industry seems to be where usage of scanning techniques is least common. Only 4 % of the companies already use some type of scanning technique, 5 % do not but intend to in the future. 39 % do not use any scanning technique and 52 % did not answer to the question. 3.3.1

Aggregated data for primary processing of softwood

3.3.1.1 The companies and their general view of quality There were 128 companies in the survey that work within primary processing and only with softwood. This is 73 % of all secondary processing companies and 17 % of all participating companies in the survey. Figure 40 shows the turnover and the raw material consumption of companies in the primary processing industry. Measured by their turnover, most companies in the primary processing industry are small companies with a turnover up to 2 million € or larger ones with a turnover between 11 million € and 250 million €. Large companies with a turnover higher than 250 million € have a share of only about 2 %. Regarding the companies’ raw material consumption, nearly half of the companies are small with a raw material consumption up to 25 000 m3, and approximately one third are large companies with a raw material consumption higher than 100 000 m3.

Report COST

78

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

Figure 40: Turnover and raw material consumption of companies in primary processing of softwood [% of respondents]. More than three quarters of primary processing industries buy their raw material on regional markets. This is followed by more than a third that uses national raw material markets. The smallest number of companies obtain raw material on international markets. Also in the primary processing industry, companies normally do not use just one of the named markets. Of all three types of processing industries, companies that work within primary processing tend mostly to purchase raw material in one market. The increase in the number of answers compared to the number of respondents is ca. 35.94 %. For the detailed numbers of responses concerning raw material markets, see Table 35. Table 35: Raw material markets used by companies in primary processing of softwood (multiple answers possible). Raw material markets Regional markets National markets International markets No answer

Primary processing of softwood [n (%)] 100 (78.1) 48 (37.5) 25 (19.5) 1 (0.8)

Settlement of rounding difference [%] Total

0 174 (135.9)

Report COST

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

79

Mainly-used species of timber are also in the primary processing industries Norway spruce/fir (whitewood) and Scots pine (redwood). Only ca. 3 % use Sitka spruce and about one quarter use other softwood species. Even in primary processing, there are some companies, ca. 4 %, that use hardwood species. See Table 36 for the distribution of species that are used by the primary processing industry. Table 36: Species of timber being processed by companies in primary processing of softwood (multiple answers possible). Species of timber being processed Norway spruce/fir (whitewood) Scots pine (redwood) Sitka spruce Other softwoods (conifer species) Hardwood species No answer

Primary processing of softwood [n (%)] 78 (60.9) 48 (37.5) 4 (3.1) 33 (25.8) 5 (3.9) 34 (26.6)

Settlement of rounding difference [%] Total

0 202 (157.8)

The building industry is most reckoned among the top four important customers of primary processing companies. It is followed by agents and timber trading companies and then by the industry sector for structural timber components; such as roof trusses, floors and walls. These three customer groups are those who most often count as one of the four most important for all types of producers – primary, as well as secondary and integrated processing. The main difference between the types of producers is that agents and timber trading companies are more important customers to the primary processing industry than they are to the secondary and the integrated processing industries. The furniture industry is also here most seldom among the top four important customers. The specification of other customers shows that also the primary processing companies have their important customers in the packaging and pallets industry. Other woodworking industries, the metallurgical industry or various other industries are also mentioned as important customers. Figure 41 shows the companies’ top four important customers and a ranking of these.

Report COST

80

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

Figure 41: Top four important customer groups in primary processing of softwood (upper part, [% of respondents]) and a ranking of these (lower part). Although the larger portion of primary processing industries – more than one third – would consider a strict quality control more or less feasible, the share of those companies that would not see it feasible, is higher here than the one in the secondary and integrated processing industries. Approximately one third claims that the quality of sawn timber is easy to define and control. The larger portion (45 %) stays neutral to this statement, and 22 % disagree that the quality of sawn timber is easy to define and control. See Figure 42 for an overview of the companies’ opinion concerning the two statements.

Report COST

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

81

Figure 42: Primary processing of softwood companies’ rating of statements concerning quality and quality control [% of respondents]. When asked to evaluate the statement “strict quality control is too expensive” and “customers must accept a certain level of non-conformity,” the responses were more evenly distributed than in secondary and integrated industries (Figure 43). Also in Figure 43, it is seen that the clearly greatest share of the primary processing industries do not see a producer-driven timber market as a reason for customers to accept what they are offered by the producers. Compared to the other processing industries, the primary processing industries have the least tendency to see the customers forced to accept the producers’ offerings because of a producer-driven timber market.

Figure 43: Primary processing of softwood companies’ rating of statements concerning producer and market related reasons for dissatisfying quality [% of respondents]. Report COST

82

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

More than half of the companies in the primary processing industry consider the fact that wood is a natural product as reason for some quality defects and shortcomings which the customers have to accept. Also, approximately one third give a neutral answer to this statement. See Figure 44 for an overview of the companies’ rating of this statement. These results are comparable to the results from the secondary and integrated processing companies.

Figure 44: Primary processing of softwood companies’ rating of statements concerning product related reasons for dissatisfying quality [% of respondents]. 3.3.1.2 The companies’ experience with drying related quality aspects When specifying the moisture content in contracts, most companies use a plus/ minus interval, e.g. 16 % ± 4 %, followed by naming a range, e.g. 12 % - 20 %, or a statistical approach. Some companies also use other systems; such as specifying maximum moisture content or a combination of some of the given systems. Table 37 shows the details in the number of responses for the different systems of specifying the moisture content. Table 37: Systems for specifying the moisture content in contracts used by companies in primary processing of softwood (multiple answers possible). System used for specifying moisture content in contracts Plus/minus interval Range Statistical approach Other No answer

Primary processing of softwood [n (%)] 62 (48.4) 22 (17.2) 18 (14.1) 12 (9.4) 15 (11.7)

Settlement of rounding difference [%] Total

0 129 (100.8)

Report COST

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

83

Measurements of the moisture content with the resistance or conductance method are most common. Two thirds of the companies use these methods. The second largest fraction measures the moisture content with a gravimetric method. The third largest portion, 16 %, normally does not measure the moisture content. Companies also combine several methods of measurement. For details about the usage of methods for measurement of the moisture content, see Table 38. Table 38: Methods for measurement of moisture content used by companies in primary processing of softwood (multiple answers possible). Measurement of moisture content Normally not Gravimetric Resistance/conductance Capacitance No answer

Primary processing of softwood [n (%)] 20 (15.6) 26 (20.3) 84 (65.6) 15 (11.7) 10 (7.8)

Settlement of rounding difference [%] Total

0.1 155 (121.1)

Table 39 shows that in the primary processing industries approximately two thirds of the companies do not specify an allowable degree of case hardening/ moisture content gradients. Compared to the other producers, fewer primary processing companies tend to consider the possibility if they knew the benefits. Table 39: Specification of case hardening degree in primary processing of softwood. Allowable degree of case hardening/MC gradients Yes No Might do, if benefits were known No answer

Primary processing of softwood [n (%)] 16 (12.5) 81 (63.3) 9 (7.0) 22 (17.2)

Settlement of rounding difference [%] Total

0 128 (100)

Most companies conduct some form of quality control. About 70 % apply a visual inspection, followed by about one third that do random sampling and measurements. Also here, the companies obviously use several of the named schemes. Table 40 shows a detailed view of the schemes used for quality control.

Report COST

84

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

Table 40: Schemes of quality control used by companies in primary processing of softwood (multiple answers possible). Used schemes of quality control None Visual inspection Random sampling and measurements Measurements of all dried timber Statistical evaluation of measurements No answer

Primary processing of softwood [n (%)] 7 (5.5) 91 (71.1) 44 (34.4) 18 (14.1) 8 (6.3) 21 (16.4)

Settlement of rounding difference [%] Total

-0.1 189 (147.7)

As seen in Table 40, only a few companies actually measure all dried timber. Accordingly, least companies specify acceptable limits in quality control after drying, since a visual inspection or random sampling and measurement would hardly be sufficient to comply with these limits. According to Figure 45, more than 80 % of the companies in primary processing do not define acceptable limits, the respondent did not know about, or did not answer regarding twist, bow and spring distortion, and cup deformation. Primary processing industries are in general less likely to conduct quality control regarding the types of distortion named above, compared to the secondary and integrated processing industries.

Report COST

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

85

Figure 45: Acceptable limits regarding distortion in the quality control of companies in primary processing of softwood [% of respondents]. Distortion is not often found in production among most of the primary processing industries. Twist and bow distortion occur more frequently than spring distortion or cup, cf. Figure 46. As in the secondary and integrated processing industries, there is a substantial number of companies even in primary processing that did not answer.

Report COST

86

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

Figure 46: Frequency of different types of distortion occurring in primary production of softwood products [% of respondents]. Causes for the four types of deformation and distortion are reported in Figure 47. As already seen in the secondary and integrated processing, twist distortion is the type of distortion with most possible presumed causes. Most cited were over drying, poor wood quality in general, poor stickering and a too big extent of compression wood. Improper storage and timber from small diameter logs are seen as causes for twist distortion by the smallest number of companies. Also bow distortion is listed as having several causes, but most of all the extent of compression wood, followed by poor stickering. Timber from small diameter logs as a cause for bow distortion has the smallest share even here. Regarding spring and cup distortion, more companies answered that they do not know the reasons for the distortion, as also was the case in secondary and inteReport COST

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

87

grated processing. These two types of deformation are also less frequently found in production, so the companies probably have less experience with these defects. Otherwise, the extent of compression wood, poor wood quality in general and over drying are mostly seen as causes for spring distortion. According to the results of the survey, cup deformation is clearly caused by over drying. The second largest fraction of the primary processing industries experience poor stickering as cause for deformation and distortion. There is a substantial number of companies that did not answer this question, which makes it difficult to analyse the data. See the comment about this in Chapter 3.2 about secondary and integrated processing industries.

Figure 47: Causes for distortion/deformation according to the primary softwood processing industry (multiple answers possible), [% of respondents].

Report COST

88

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

If companies experience quality problems regarding the colour, they usually contact the kiln manufacturer, colleagues in neighbouring companies and research institutes or universities (Table 41). Table 41: Companies’ contacts when experiencing problems regarding colour in primary softwood processing industry (multiple answers possible). Contact for assistance in problems with respect to colour Kiln manufacturer Colleague in neighbouring company Private consultant Research institute/University Trade/industry association

Primary processing of softwood [n (%)] 34 (26.6) 30 (23.4) 8 (6.3) 22 (17.2) 19 (14.8)

I don't speak to other people about my problems No answer

8 (6.3) 48 (37.5)

Settlement of rounding difference [%] Total

-0.1 169 (132)

Most companies in primary processing either, did not answer how often they experience claims by customers that are caused by discolouration, or they stated to experience it seldom. If there are claims caused by discolouration, it is caused primarily by surface mould, cloudy stain and sticker staining. Blue stain as a cause of claims experienced in secondary and integrated processing is less than claims in primary processing. Despite the companies in this chapter stated that they work only with softwood, there is a relatively high share of companies that experience claims by customers caused by red discolouration of beech (Figure 48).

Figure 48: Discolouration causing claims from customers to primary softwood processing companies [% of respondents]. Report COST

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

89

In general, companies in primary processing are also more or less satisfied with the quality of their products with respect to the quality parameters of moisture content, distortion, colour, knots and other defects. Half or more of the companies are more or less frequently satisfied with all of these parameters (Figure 49). Primary processing [n (%)]

Primary processing [n (%)]

1

30 (23.4)

1

18 (14.1)

2

56 (43.8)

2

47 (36.7)

3

16 (12.5)

3

29 (22.7)

4

7 (5.5)

4

15 (11.7)

5

6 (4.7)

5

4 (3.1)

6

3 (2.3)

6

5 (3.9)

NA

10 (7.8)

NA

10 (7.8)

SRD

0

SRD

0

Total

128 (100)

Total

128 (100)

Moisture content

Distortion

Primary processing [n (%)]

Primary processing [n (%)]

1

29 (22.7)

1

14 (10.9)

2

48 (37.5)

2

50 (39.1)

3

23 (18.0)

3

32 (25.0)

4

8 (6.3)

4

12 (9.4)

5

8 (6.3)

5

7 (5.5)

6

2 (1.6)

6

3 (2.3)

NA

10 (7.8)

NA

10 (7.8)

SRD

-0.2

SRD

0

Total

128 (100)

Total

128 (100)

Colour

Primary processing [n (%)] 1

15 (11.7)

2

54 (42.2)

3

28 (21.9)

4

9 (7.0)

5

8 (6.3)

6

3 (2.3)

NA

11 (8.6)

SRD

0

Total

128 (100)

Other defects

Knots 1 = frequently satisfied 6 = frequently not satisfied NA = no answer

SRD = settlement of rounding difference [%]

Figure 49: Companies’ satisfaction regarding different quality parameters in the primary processing of softwood.

Report COST

90

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

3.3.1.3 The companies’ usage of grading standards and technology Also the questionnaire directed to primary processing companies had many missing answers regarding grading. The conclusion that all types of strength grading are hardly used, is unreliable here, just as in secondary and integrated processing. If companies perform strength grading, visual grading by eye is most common. About 22 % of the companies grade more than 50 % of their sawn timber visually by eye. See Figure 50 for the distribution of types of grading used in the industry.

Figure 50: Types of strength grading used in primary processing of softwood [% of respondents]. Machine strength grading is applied for a rather small part of the produced sawn timber. Besides the 25 % of the respondents that machine grade 0-5 % of the sawn timber, which also could mean that they do not grade at all, most companies use machine strength grading for ca. 10 % of their production. Another comparably large portion here represents the 3 % of the companies who use machine strength grading for more than 50 % of the produced sawn timber. But compared to the companies in secondary and integrated processing, this share is only the half. Where machine strength grading is applied, most companies use vibration machines, followed by bending machines. There are only a few companies that use X-ray machines, and combinations of X-ray and the traditional machines are used just very occasionally and so are also other types of machines (Table 42).

Report COST

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

91

Table 42: Machines for strength grading used in primary processing of softwood (multiple answers possible). Machines used for machine strength grading Primary processing of softwood [n (%)] Bending machine 4 (3.1) Vibration machine 7 (5.5) X-ray machine 2 (1.6) X-ray & bending 0 (0) X-ray & vibration 2 (1.6) Other 2 (1.6) No answer 112 (87.5) Settlement of rounding difference [%] Total

-0.1 129 (100.8)

Strength classes that are produced by machine strength grading are mainly those equal to and between C30 and C24, followed by classes lower than C24. Classes higher than C30 are produced by only approximately 3 %. If the timber is graded visually, most companies produce strength classes lower than or equal to C24. A detailed overview of the produced strength classes can be found in Tables 43 and 44. Table 43: Strength grades produced by machine strength grading in primary processing of softwood (multiple answers possible). Strength classes produced by machine strength grading Higher than C30 Equal and between C30 and C24 Lower than C24 Glulam grades Don't machine strength grade softwood No answer

Primary processing of softwood [n (%)] 4 (3.1) 12 (9.4) 8 (6.3) 5 (3.9) 26 (20.3) 85 (66.4)

Settlement of rounding difference [%] Total

0 140 (109.4)

Report COST

92

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

Table 44: Strength grades produced by visual strength grading in primary processing of softwood (multiple answers possible). Strength classes produced by visual strength grading Higher than C20 Lower or equal to C20 Glulam grades Higher than C24 Lower or equal to C24 Glulam grades (LS, LD, L-grades) Don't visual strength grade softwood No answer

Primary processing of softwood [n (%)] 8 (6.3) 13 (10.2) 0 (0) 13 (10.2) 22 (17.2) 3 (2.3) 27 (21.1) 60 (46.9)

Settlement of rounding difference [%] Total

-0.1 146 (114.1)

Companies occasionally produce strength classes by visual grading of hardwood, which is interesting since the companies actually only use softwood. According to the results of the survey, CE-marking of products is not common in the primary processing industry either. 23 % apply it, 45 % do not. Also when rating a statement about the possibilities of the “certification by the means of the CE-label” to “provide more guarantee for reliability of timber products”, 22 % would agree that these possibilities exist. See Figure 51 for the overview of companies’ rating of this statement.

Figure 51: Primary softwood processing companies’ rating of statement on CE-certification of timber products [% of respondents].

Report COST

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

93

Companies performing machine strength grading have visual override accounting for 25 % of the rejects (Table 45). Table 45: Share of total rejects caused by visual override in machine strength grading in primary processing of softwood. Share of total rejects that is caused by visual overrides 0-25 % 26-50 % 51-75 % 76-100 % No answer

Primary processing of softwood [n (%)] 34 (26.6) 1 (0.8) 4 (3.1) 2 (1.6) 87 (68.0)

Settlement of rounding difference [%] Total

-0.1 128 (100)

According to Figure 52, knots and rot/decay/stain are the two quality parameters that most often lead to rejection or downgrading in the visual grading in the primary processing industry.

1 = frequently, 6 = infrequently, NA = no answer

Figure 52: Frequency of knots and rot/decay/stain as causes for rejection/downgrading in visual grading in primary processing of softwood [% of respondents]. The frequency of cracks as causes for rejection or downgrading is slightly less than the frequency of knots and rot/decay/stain. More than one quarter of the primary processing companies experience rejection caused by cracks, whereby about one quarter more or less frequently experience this (Figure 53).

Report COST

94

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

1 = frequently 6 = infrequently NA = no answer

Figure 53: Frequency of cracks as causes for rejection/downgrading in visual grading in primary processing of softwood [% of respondents]. As seen in Figure 54, the frequency of wane experienced as a cause for rejection or downgrading is more or less evenly distributed. But there is a slight tendency to “infrequently” having rejections/downgrading caused by wane. 1 = frequently 6 = infrequently NA = no answer

Figure 54: Frequency of wane as cause for rejection/downgrading in visual grading in primary processing of softwood [% of respondents].

Report COST

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

95

Figure 55 describes the frequency of distortion and the extent of compression wood as causes for rejection or downgrading in visual grading of timber products. The distribution is quite even, with a tendency to “sometimes” or “infrequently” experience these parameters as causes for rejection/downgrading.

1 = frequently, 6 = infrequently, NA = no answer

Figure 55: Frequency of distortion and the extent of compression wood as causes for rejection/downgrading in visual grading in primary processing of softwood [% of respondents]. The width of growth rings, dimensions and the slope of grain/cross grain are less frequently experienced causes for rejection or downgrading by visual grading in the primary processing industry (Figure 56).

Report COST

96

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

1 = frequently 6 = infrequently NA = no answer

Figure 56: Frequency of growth ring width, dimensions and slope of grain as causes for rejection/downgrading in visual grading in primary processing of softwood [% of respondents]. Other defects causing rejection or downgrading by visual grading are occasionally found. Those are mostly defects caused by insects and other mechanical defects. As the questionnaire explicitly instructs the respondents to skip this question when they do not grade visually, the high number of non-respondents can be explained at least partly. Some companies might also just answer regarding a few of the asked parameters and skip those they never experience.

Report COST

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

97

In a general overview about strength grading of structural timber, a larger portion of the companies in the primary processing industry, about 20 %, would see a certain need in an improved strength grading of structural timber. But the portion of companies that stay more or less neutral to the statement is approximately equal, at only 1 % more (Table 46). Table 46: Primary softwood processing companies’ rating of statement regarding strength grading of structural timber. Strength grading of structural timber has to be improved in general

1 = fully agree, 6 = fully disagree 1 2 3 4 5 6 NA Settlement of rounding difference [%] Total

Primary processing of softwood [n (%)] 11 (8.6) 14 (10.9) 15 (11.7) 12 (9.4) 11 (8.6) 7 (5.5) 58 (45.3)

0 128 (100)

Although there are fewer companies using machine strength grading but more using visual strength grading, a larger portion of the companies would agree with the statement that visual strength grading will be less important in the future (Table 47). Table 47: Primary softwood processing companies’ rating of statement regarding the future importance of visual strength grading. Visual strength grading will be less important in the future

1 = fully agree, 6 = fully disagree 1 2 3 4 5 6 NA Settlement of rounding difference [%] Total

Report COST

Primary processing of softwood [n (%)] 13 (10.2) 21 (16.4) 13 (10.2) 9 (7.0) 8 (6.3) 9 (7.0) 55 (43.0)

-0.1 128 (100)

98

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

A demand for strength grades higher than C30 is clearly not seen by companies in the primary processing industry, as shown in Table 48. Table 48: Primary softwood processing companies’ rating of statement regarding the demand for high strength classes. There is a demand for high strength grades 1 = fully agree, (over C30) 6 = fully disagree 1 2 3 4 5 6 NA Settlement of rounding difference [%] Total

Primary processing of softwood [n (%)] 3 (2.3) 9 (7.0) 13 (10.2) 10 (7.8) 13 (10.2) 22 (17.2) 58 (45.3)

0 128 (100)

Also in the primary processing industry, most respondents stay neutral to the statement that “output control is a good alternative to strength grading according to fixed machine settings” (Table 49). Table 49: Primary softwood processing companies’ rating of statement regarding output control versus fixed machine settings in strength grading. Output control is a good alternative to strength grading according to fixed machine settings

1 = fully agree, 6 = fully disagree 1 2 3 4 5 6 NA Settlement of rounding difference [%] Total

Primary processing of softwood [n (%)] 4 (3.1) 6 (4.7) 25 (19.5) 12 (9.4) 6 (4.7) 7 (5.5) 68 (53.1)

0 128 (100)

One quarter of the primary processing companies would expect the “utilisation of timber and engineered timber products to be enhanced by more effective machine grading procedures” (Table 50), although the larger portion of all companies do not use machine strength grading. Report COST

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

99

Table 50: Primary softwood processing companies’ rating of statement regarding the correlation of the utilisation of timber products and the effectiveness of machine grading procedures. Utilisation of timber and engineered timber products would be enhanced by more effective machine grading procedures

1 = fully agree, 6 = fully disagree 1 2 3 4 5 6 NA Settlement of rounding difference [%] Total

Primary processing of softwood [n (%)] 13 (10.2) 19 (14.8) 17 (13.3) 11 (8.6) 6 (4.7) 5 (3.9) 57 (44.5)

0 128 (100)

As the majority of primary processing industries use raw materials from regional markets (Table 35), half of the responding companies also stay neutral to the question if it is “more important to be able to grade timber from a large geographical area in the same grader settings than have optimised settings for timber from specific regions”. The second largest portion would not agree with the statement (Table 51). Table 51: Primary softwood processing companies’ rating of statement regarding machine settings for timber from different regions. It is more important to be able to grade timber from a large geographical area on the same grader settings than have optimised settings for timber from specific regions

1 = fully agree, 6 = fully disagree 1 2 3 4 5 6 NA Settlement of rounding difference [%] Total

Report COST

Primary processing of softwood [n (%)] 3 (2.3) 12 (9.4) 19 (14.8) 12 (9.4) 9 (7.0) 8 (6.3) 65 (50.8)

0 128 (100)

100

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

For the majority of the primary processing industries, it is also more or less “important to have machine settings for a large number of grades and combinations available for use” (Table 52), and it is also more or less desirable for them “to always have the same setting for a strength grade, whatever combinations are being graded” (Table 53). Table 52: Primary softwood processing companies’ rating of statement regarding machine settings for different number of grades. It is important to have machine settings for a large number of grades and combinations available for use

1 = fully agree, 6 = fully disagree 1 2 3 4 5 6 NA Settlement of rounding difference [%] Total

Primary processing of softwood [n (%)] 10 (7.8) 14 (10.9) 14 (10.9) 8 (6.3) 4 (3.1) 9 (7.0) 69 (53.9)

0.1 128 (100)

Table 53: Primary softwood processing companies’ rating of statement regarding machine settings for strength grades. It is desirable to always have the same setting for a strength grade, whatever combinations are being graded

1 = fully agree, 6 = Primary processing of softwood fully disagree [n (%)] 1 6 (4.7) 2 20 (15.6) 3 11 (8.6) 4 13 (10.2) 5 4 (3.1) 6 5 (3.9) NA 69 (53.9) Settlement of rounding difference [%] Total

0 128 (100)

That “machine strength grading of green timber needs to be developed”, is confirmed by nearly one quarter of the companies in the primary processing industry (Table 54).

Report COST

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

101

Table 54: Primary softwood processing companies’ rating of statement regarding machine strength grading for green timber. Machine strength grading of green timber needs to be developed

1 = fully agree, 6 = fully disagree 1 2 3 4 5 6 NA

Primary processing of softwood [n (%)] 13 (10.2) 18 (14.1) 9 (7.0) 11 (8.6) 4 (3.1) 6 (4.7) 67 (52.3)

Settlement of rounding difference [%] Total

3.3.2

0 128 (100)

Discussion regarding the primary processing of softwood

The general results from the primary processing industry do not differ from those of the secondary and integrated processing industry. Also the primary producers are generally satisfied with the drying quality of their products and are willing to meet the customers’ requirements. Reasons for contradictory dissatisfaction of customers can be the industry’s costs for a strict quality control, but not so much a producer-driven timber market where the quality is being defined and declared by the producers. Also in the primary processing industry, the reasons for differences in the quality, and thereby dissatisfaction of the customers, are that wood is a natural product and the wood properties therefore can be inhomogeneous. Perceived causes of deformation are in general experienced similarly by the different producers, except for the causes for cup deformation. After similarities in experiencing over drying as the main reason for cup deformation, the second most important causes are experienced differently. In primary processing industries it is poor stickering, in secondary processing industries it is wrong storage and poor wood quality in general, and in integrated processing industries it is poor wood quality in general and timber of small diameter. Kiln manufacturers, colleagues in neighbouring companies and research institutes or universities are the most contacted consultants when industries experience problems with discolouration and want to learn more about that. The part of the questionnaire for primary processing regarding grading of timber has many missing answers. The reliability of the results is debatable. According to the results, grading is seldom applied in the primary processing industry. If grading is applied, it is mostly visual grading. The primary processing industries contemplate that visual strength grading will be less important in the future. Still, Report COST

102

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

the question remains how far the processing industry in general will be willing to take part in this improvement, because it is uncertain how widely grading technologies are actually used in the industry and what knowledge the industry has about them. Even though there are few companies in primary processing that produce high strength classes, a demand for higher classes has been noticed here too. The producers’ interest in CE-marking of timber products is a debatable point. Knots, cracks and rot/decay/stain are the most frequently experienced causes for rejection or downgrading in the visual grading of timber products. Cracks lead more often to rejection in secondary and integrated processing than in primary. Growth ring width and slope of grain/cross grain are less frequently experienced parameters causing rejection or downgrading by visual grading in all types of processing. Primary processing industries are more satisfied with the dimensions when grading the products visually than the secondary and integrated processing industries. The part of the primary producers’ questionnaire regarding scanning techniques over and above machine strength grading is also very incomplete and the results are very unreliable. It can be assumed that the techniques are seldom used in the processing industries, and the tendency to start the usage is not very high. It is debatable if the companies have enough knowledge about, and/or interest in, scanning of timber. According to one of the introductory questions, the companies work only with softwood. Contrary to this statement, some companies in all types of processing occasionally seem to use a certain amount of hardwood. A small number of companies experience red discolouration in beech as a cause for claims from customers. There are also a few companies that produce strength classes by visual grading of hardwood.

3.4 Processing of hardwood The technical requirements and the organisation in companies that work with hardwood are different from those in softwood working companies. Because of that fact, the processing of hardwood is examined in a separate chapter. As the number of companies that deal with hardwood only, or with both hardwood and softwood, is too small in the different types of processing and also because of the poor quality of large portions of the data sets, as seen in the chapters before, this chapter includes all stages of hardwood processing industry; see the blue items in Figure 57.

Report COST

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

Sawmilling industry = primary processing

103

Further processing of sawn timber = secondary processing

Building, construction, designing with sawn timber products

Trading

Figure 57: Parts of value chain of hardwood processing examined in this chapter. 3.4.1

Aggregated data for processing of hardwood

3.4.1.1 The companies and their general view of quality There are 47 primary processing companies in the survey that deal either with hardwood only or with both soft- and hardwood. 63 companies deal with these types of wood in secondary processing. 91 companies are active in integrated production with hardwood or both types of wood. In all types of processing, most companies deal with both hardwood and softwood, namely about 60 % (Table 55). Table 55: Type of wood being processed by business domain. Type of wood Hardwood only Hard- and softwood Total

Primary processing Secondary processing Integrated processing [n (%)] [n (%)] [n (%)] 19 (40.4) 22 (34.9) 39 (42.9) 28 (59.6) 41 (65.1) 52 (57.1) 47 (100)

63 (100)

91 (100)

Especially in the primary and in the secondary processing industry, most companies are small with a turnover up to 2 million € and a raw material consumption up to 25 000 m3. Measured by turnover, the companies dealing with integrated production are small and medium sized. About one third have a turnover up to 2 million € and one third have a turnover from 2 million € to 10 million €. The turnover of approximately one quarter is from 11 million € to 250 million €. Measured by their raw material consumption, most companies are also small, with a consumption up to 25 000 m3. For an overview of the companies’ turnover and raw material consumption, see Figure 58.

Report COST

104

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

Figure 58: Turnover and raw material consumption of hardwood processing companies [% of respondents]. Table 56 shows the raw material markets used by the processing industries. Three quarters of the primary processing industries use regional raw material markets, more than half use national markets for buying their raw material and a little bit more than one quarter obtain the raw material from international markets. Two thirds of the secondary processing industries obtain their raw material from national markets. The second most important markets are international markets, and the least-used markets are regional raw material markets. The integrated industries mostly get their raw material from national markets. Two thirds of the companies use these markets. More than half of the companies use regional markets, and international raw material markets are used by approximately the same share. Table 56: Raw material markets used by hardwood processing companies (multiple answers possible). Raw material markets Regional markets National markets International markets No answer Settlement of rounding difference [%] Total

Secondary processing Integrated processing Primary processing [n (%)] [n (%)] [n (%)] 23 (36.5) 48 (52.7) 35 (74.5) 42 (66.7) 60 (65.9) 27 (57.4) 28 (44.4) 47 (51.6) 13 (27.7) 1 (1.6) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 94 (149.2)

Report COST

0.1 155 (170.3)

0 75 (159.6)

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

105

The companies that are discussed in this chapter defined themselves in the introduction of the questionnaires as working with hardwood only or with both hardwood and softwood. But not all companies stated that they use hardwood species when asked later in a more specific question. Here only 64 % of the primary processing industries deal with hardwood, compared to 59 % of the secondary processing industries and about 67 % of companies in integrated production. Even when the relatively high number of missing answers is considered, about one quarter of the companies do not state that they use hardwood according to this question. When softwood is being processed, it is whitewood that tends to be used in primary processing, and redwood in secondary processing. Equal amounts are used in integrated production. A detailed overview of the used wood species is given in Table 57. Table 57: Species of timber being processed by hardwood processing companies (multiple answers possible). Species of timber being processed

Secondary processing Integrated processing Primary processing [n (%)] [n (%)] [n (%)]

Norway spruce/fir (whitewood) Scots pine (redwood) Sitka spruce

17 (27.0) 21 (33.3) 1 (1.6)

30 (33.0) 29 (31.9) 7 (7.7)

15 (31.9) 7 (14.9) 5 (10.6)

Other softwoods (conifer species) Hardwood species No answer

8 (12.7) 37 (58.7) 22 (34.9)

19 (20.9) 61 (67.0) 28 (30.8)

8 (17.0) 30 (63.8) 12 (25.5)

0.1 106 (168.3)

-0.1 174 (191.2)

0.1 77 (163.8)

Settlement of rounding difference [%] Total

Figure 59 shows how often different customer groups are counted among the four most important in the three types of processing sectors. For the primary processing industry it is mostly agents and timber merchants followed by the furniture industry and other components industries; such as windows, doors, flooring, etc. For the secondary processing industry it is mostly other components industries; such as windows, doors, flooring, followed by the furniture industry and the building components sector. For integrated companies it is mostly the furniture industry and other components sectors in even portions, followed by agents and timber merchants. The engineered wood products industry and other customers are most seldom counted by all types of producers.

Report COST

106

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

“Other customers” are mostly the packaging and pallets industry for primary and secondary processing companies. Apart from that, it can range from individual craftspeople to other industries; such as food- and chemistry. Companies in the integrated production have more individual and private customers with a range from brushes and brooms, over special interiors for boats to caravan and motor home production.

Figure 59: Top four important customer groups in the hardwood processing industry [% of respondents]. The distribution of the companies’ answer to the statement that “strict quality control is not feasible” is relatively even. Approximately one third of all producers of hardwood products would consider it “easy to define and control the quality of sawn timber”. While more companies in the primary processing industry would not consider it easy, most companies in secondary and integrated processing stay more or less neutral to this statement (Figure 60).

Report COST

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

107

Figure 60: Hardwood processing companies’ rating of statements concerning quality and quality control [% of respondents]. Most companies in the secondary and in the integrated processing industry do not agree with the statement that “strict quality control is too expensive and customers must accept a certain level of non-conformity”. But the distribution of companies agreeing, staying neutral or not agreeing with this statement is relatively even, especially in the integrated production. Primary processing companies mostly stay neutral, but about 30 % do agree (Figure 61). No clear tendency by producers was observed to require customers to accept nonconformity in quality aspects because of too high costs for quality control. In Figure 61, the distribution of the answers is shown when asked whether a producer-driven timber market is a reason for customers to accept the quality of goods they receive. Most companies do not agree with this statement. So also for hardwood products; the actual contradictory dissatisfaction of customers cannot (clearly) be explained with producer-related reasons. Instead, also in the hardwood processing industry, the reasons seem to be product related, since wood is a natural product and most producers also see this as a reason for some quality defects or shortcomings that have to be accepted by the customers (Figure 62).

Report COST

108

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

Figure 61: Hardwood processing companies’ rating of statements concerning producer and market related reasons for dissatisfying quality [% of respondents].

Figure 62: Hardwood processing companies’ rating of statement concerning product related reasons for dissatisfying quality [% of respondents].

Report COST

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

109

3.4.1.2 The companies’ experience with drying related quality aspects When the moisture content of hardwood products is specified in contracts, mostly a plus/minus interval is used, e.g. 16 % ± 4 %. The second most common rating is specified moisture content by range, e.g. 12 % - 20 % (Table 58). When the moisture content is measured by producers, the largest portion of all producers use the resistance/conductance method, the second largest portion measures the moisture content by the capacitance method. The share of companies that normally do not measure the moisture content is greatest in the primary processing industry (Table 59). Table 58: Systems for specifying moisture content in contracts used by hardwood processing companies (multiple answers possible). System used for specifying moisture content in contracts Plus/minus interval Range Statistic approach Other No answer Settlement of rounding difference [%] Total

Secondary processing Integrated processing Primary processing [n (%)] [n (%)] [n (%)] 27 (42.9) 42 (46.2) 16 (34.0) 12 (19.0) 22 (24.2) 15 (31.9) 8 (12.7) 15 (16.5) 6 (12.8) 10 (15.9) 8 (8.8) 7 (14.9) 6 (9.5) 10 (11.0) 3 (6.4) 0 63 (100)

-0.1 97 (106.6)

0 47 (100)

Table 59: Methods for measurements of moisture content used by hardwood processing companies (multiple answers possible). Measurement of Secondary processing Integrated processing Primary processing moisture content [n (%)] [n (%)] [n (%)] Normally not 5 (7.9) 6 (6.6) 7 (14.9) Gravimetric 8 (12.7) 24 (26.4) 4 (8.5) Resistance/conductance 47 (74.6) 70 (76.9) 33 (70.2) Capacitance 16 (25.4) 26 (28.6) 6 (12.8) No answer 2 (3.2) 5 (5.5) 1 (2.1) Settlement of rounding difference [%] Total

0 78 (123.8)

0 131 (144)

0 51 (108.5)

Nearly all companies that work with hardwood perform some scheme of quality control. Visual inspection is most common, followed by random sampling and measurements. Measurements of all dried timber are more common in the integrated production of hardwood products. The tendency to not perform any quality control seems to be higher in the secondary processing of hardwood than in integrated and primary processing (Table 60). Report COST

110

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

Table 60: Schemes of quality control used by hardwood processing companies (multiple answers possible). Used schemes of quality control None Visual inspection Random sampling and measurements

Secondary processing Integrated processing Primary processing [n (%)] [n (%)] [n (%)] 5 (7.9) 2 (2.2) 1 (2.1) 40 (63.5) 54 (59.3) 38 (80.9) 27 (42.9)

50 (54.9)

19 (40.4)

Measurements of all dried timber

9 (14.3)

15 (16.5)

7 (14.9)

Statistical evaluation of measurements No answer

4 (6.3) 7 (11.1)

12 (13.2) 13 (14.3)

4 (8.5) 3 (6.4)

Settlement of rounding difference [%] Total

0 92 (146)

0 146 (160.4)

0 72 (153.2)

According to the results of the survey, all types of distortion or deformation – twist, bow, spring and cup – are sometimes found in all types of production. Secondary and integrated companies that find twist, bow and spring distortion “very often”, are more prevalent than companies that find cup deformation “very often”. This is contrary to the results the primary processing sector, where more companies find cup deformation “very often” than they find the three types of distortion “very often.” Figure 63 shows the presumed causes for the above named deformations or distortions as producers experienced it. Reported causes for twist distortion are mostly poor wood quality in general, poor stickering and over drying in the secondary and integrated processing industries. Companies in the primary processing also consider poor wood quality in general, most as a cause for twist distortion. This is followed in even amounts by poor stickering, improper storage and the extent of compression wood. Poor stickering is mostly seen as a cause for bow distortion by all of the producers. This is followed by improper storage in the primary processing industry and in the secondary processing industry, and by poor wood quality in general in the integrated production sector. Spring distortion is mainly experienced caused by poor wood quality in general. While the next cause for spring distortion is seen in the extent of compression wood in the primary and secondary processing industries, integrated producing industries consider over drying the next important cause.

Report COST

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

111

Over drying and poor wood quality in general are considered important causes for cup deformation in all processing industries. In primary processing industries, poor wood quality is more often seen as cause than over drying. In secondary processing industries, over drying is more often seen as cause than is poor wood quality. In integrated production sectors, the two causes are considered about the same.

Figure 63: Causes for distortion/deformation according to the hardwood processing industry (multiple answers possible), [% of respondents].

Report COST

112

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

Colleagues in neighbouring companies and the kiln manufacturer are mostly contacted when industries that process hardwood experience problems regarding the colour of their products and want to learn more. Research institutes or universities are more often contacted by integrated producing companies, and the trade or industry association is more often used by secondary processing industries. Private consultants are lesser used contacts when producers of hardwood products experience colour problems (Table 61). Table 61: Companies’ contacts when experiencing problems regarding colour in hardwood processing industries (multiple answers possible). Contact for assistance in problems with respect to colour Kiln manufacturer

Secondary processing Integrated processing Primary processing [n (%)] [n (%)] [n (%)] 13 (20.6) 27 (29.7) 16 (34.0)

Colleague in neighbouring company Private consultant

16 (25.4) 3 (4.8)

26 (28.6) 2 (2.2)

17 (36.2) 3 (6.4)

Research institute/ University

11 (17.5)

27 (29.7)

11 (23.4)

Trade/industry association

13 (20.6)

6 (6.6)

3 (6.4)

I don't speak to other people about my problems No answer

2 (3.2) 23 (36.5)

8 (8.8) 31 (34.1)

5 (10.6) 13 (27.7)

0 81 (128.6)

-0.1 127 (139.6)

0 68 (144.7)

Settlement of rounding difference [%] Total

All of the surveyed types of discolouration as causes for claims – blue stain, surface mould, sticker staining, red discolouration in beech and cloudy stain – are seldom experienced in the processing industries (Figure 64). Other discolouration experienced as causes for claims are greying, a high variation of the colour or brittleheart in the secondary processing, white spots on dry lime, moisture brands or sunburned wood in the integrated production and sapwood in the primary processing.

Report COST

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

113

Figure 64: Discolouration causing claims from customers to the hardwood processing companies [% of respondents]. In general, producers are satisfied with the quality of their products regarding the quality parameters of moisture content, distortion, colour, knots and “other defects”. Companies in all types of processing are most frequently satisfied with the moisture content and the colour. Primary processing industries mostly are “frequently satisfied” with the extent of distortion and with other defects, e.g. cracks, secondary and integrated producing industries are “more or less satisfied.” Concerning knots, mostly secondary processing industries are “frequently satisfied”, while the primary and integrated producing companies are “more or less satisfied.” For a detailed overview of the companies’ satisfaction with the different quality parameters in their products, see Figure 65.

Report COST

114

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

Secondary processing of hardwood Integrated processing of hardwood Primary processing of hardwood 1 = frequently satisfied 6 = frequently not satisfied NA = no answer

Figure 65: Companies’ satisfaction regarding different quality parameters in the hardwood processing industry [% of respondents].

Report COST

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

115

3.4.1.3 The companies’ usage of grading standards and technology Strength grading is a topic that does not seem to be of great interest for the hardwood working industry, or it is a topic that companies do not have enough knowledge about. The quality of the answers is quite poor, with a lot of missing answers. Because of that, this section will deal only with a very few overview questions about the companies’ usage of and opinion towards strength grading. Scanning techniques over and above machine strength grading is seldom used in hardwood processing industries (Table 62). Contrary to the industry that deals only with softwood, where scanning techniques are established at least for a few companies in each type of processing, scanning techniques in the hardwood processing industry are used by only two companies in the integrated production sector. Companies within primary and secondary processing of hardwood sectors do not use any scanning technique and do not intend to use any. Table 62: Usage of scanning techniques in hardwood processing companies. Usage of scanning technique over and above machine strength Secondary processing Integrated processing Primary processing grading [n (%)] [n (%)] [n (%)] Yes 0 (0) 2 (2.2) 0 (0) No 23 (36.5) 40 (44.0) 30 (63.8) No, but I intend to 3 (4.8) 7 (7.7) 1 (2.1) No answer 37 (58.7) 42 (46.2) 16 (34.0) Settlement of rounding difference [%] Total

0 63 (100)

-0.1 91 (100)

0.1 47 (100)

Figure 66 shows the distribution of the types of strength grading used. If companies perform strength grading, it is mostly a manual visual grading. Nearly one third of the primary processing industries grade more than 50 % of their sawn timber visually. The share in the integrated production is about 20 %, and in secondary processing it is about 6 %. The relatively high share of respondents that grade 0-5 % of their production should rather be interpreted as respondents grading 0 % than as respondents grading 5 % for the largest portion of the respondents, as most of them answered 0-5 % for all types of strength grading.

Report COST

116

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

Figure 66: Types of strength grading used in hardwood processing industries [% of respondents]. In visual grading in hardwood processing industries, the reasons for rejection or downgrading are mostly knots, cracks, dimensions and rot, decay and stain. Distortion and wane are more frequently considered a reason for downgrading or rejection in secondary and integrated production sectors, while primary processing industries experience these two parameters sometimes. The above-listed quality parameters are those which can be more easily detected by eye at a glance than the other parameters. Accordingly, the growth ring width, the extent of compression wood and the slope of grain are less frequently experienced reasons for rejection or downgrading by visual grading. Other parameters can occasionally cause rejection or downgrading in hardwood processing industries, e.g. the wood colour. Although even the largest portion of all hardwood processing companies does not mark products with the CE-label, about one quarter of the companies would agree in the statement that “the certification by means of the CE-label provides more guarantee for reliability of timber products”. For the secondary processing and the integrated production sector, this also is the largest portion of the respondents. In the primary processing industry, there is also about one quarter that do not agree here (Table 63).

Report COST

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

117

Table 63: Hardwood processing companies’ rating of statement on CE-certification of timber products. The certification by means of the CE-label provides more guarantee for reliability of timber products

Secondary Integrated Primary 1 = fully agree, processing processing processing 6 = fully disagree [n (%)] [n (%)] [n (%)] 1 7 (11.1) 9 (9.9) 7 (14.9) 2 8 (12.7) 11 (12.1) 5 (10.6) 3 3 (4.8) 11 (12.1) 6 (12.8) 4 4 (6.3) 4 (4.4) 1 (2.1) 5 2 (3.2) 8 (8.8) 6 (12.8) 6 4 (6.3) 4 (4.4) 5 (10.6) NA 35 (55.6) 44 (48.4) 17 (36.2) Settlement of rounding difference [%] Total

0 63 (100)

-0.1 91 (100)

0 47 (100)

All producers are in agreement that strength grading of structural timber must be improved in general (Table 64), even though most of the companies seldom perform strength grading or did not answer to related questions. This could suggest that the reason for not using strength grading is that it is currently inadequate in the opinion of producers. Table 64: Hardwood processing companies’ rating of statement regarding strength grading of timber. Strength grading of structural Secondary Integrated Primary timber has to be improved in 1 = fully agree, processing processing processing general 6 = fully disagree [n (%)] [n (%)] [n (%)] 1 5 (7.9) 11 (12.1) 6 (12.8) 2 6 (9.5) 12 (13.2) 4 (8.5) 3 5 (7.9) 9 (9.9) 5 (10.6) 4 1 (1.6) 5 (5.5) 3 (6.4) 5 2 (3.2) 6 (6.6) 3 (6.4) 6 2 (3.2) 1 (1.1) 2 (4.3) NA 42 (66.7) 47 (51.6) 24 (51.1) Settlement of rounding difference [%] Total

0 63 (100)

0 91 (100)

-0.1 47 (100)

Most respondents who answered the question in the primary processing industry think that “visual strength grading will be less important in the future”, secondary processing and integrated production stay more neutral to this (Table 65).

Report COST

118

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

Table 65: Hardwood processing companies’ rating of statement regarding the importance of visual strength grading. Visual strength grading will 1 = fully agree, be less important in the future 6 = fully disagree 1 2 3 4 5 6 NA

Secondary Integrated Primary processing processing processing [n (%)] [n (%)] [n (%)] 2 (3.2) 4 (4.4) 6 (12.8) 2 (3.2) 8 (8.8) 4 (8.5) 4 (6.3) 8 (8.8) 2 (4.3) 6 (9.5) 11 (12.1) 5 (10.6) 4 (6.3) 9 (9.9) 5 (10.6) 2 (3.2) 4 (4.4) 3 (6.4) 43 (68.3) 47 (51.6) 22 (46.8)

Settlement of rounding difference [%] Total

0 63 (100)

0 91 (100)

0 47 (100)

Most companies in the hardwood processing industry do not see any special demand for high strength grades (over C30). Table 66 shows 1) that primary processing companies see little demand, 2) that integrated producers are more or less neutral and 3) that secondary processing companies are neutral or see some demand. The share of non-answering companies is higher in the secondary processing industry for all statements rated. Table 66: Hardwood processing companies’ rating of statement regarding the demand for high strength grades. There is a demand for high strength grades (over C30)

Secondary Integrated Primary 1 = fully agree, processing processing processing 6 = fully disagree [n (%)] [n (%)] [n (%)] 1 2 (3.2) 5 (5.5) 3 (6.4) 2 5 (7.9) 6 (6.6) 3 (6.4) 3 4 (6.3) 18 (19.8) 5 (10.6) 4 4 (6.3) 10 (11.0) 0 (0) 5 2 (3.2) 2 (2.2) 5 (10.6) 6 3 (4.8) 3 (3.3) 7 (14.9) NA 43 (68.3) 47 (51.6) 24 (51.1) Settlement of rounding difference [%] Total

Report COST

0 63 (100)

0 91 (100)

0 47 (100)

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

3.4.2

119

Discussion regarding processing of hardwood

There are no significantly large differences in quality requirements, quality control, satisfaction with quality and usage of technologies for grading and scanning among the producers of softwood products only and those producing products of hardwood or both hardwood and softwood. The only big difference lies in the important customer groups. Due to the results of this survey, it could be assumed that the reason for not using strength grading is inadequate strength grading in general in the opinion of the industry. There is a high number of missing answers, but many respondents nevertheless stated that strength grading must be improved. One company in integrated production of hardwood products stated in a comment that most claims are due to breakdown in communication. This can also be assumed for many other companies, as the contradictory dissatisfaction on customer side still does not have a sufficient explanation. Producers of hardwood products are in general satisfied with the quality of their products and aim to meet the customer requirements. The comment of one of the respondents, also from a company in integrated production of hardwood products, is: “We always ‘grade’ everything, but to its use requirement, not some grading rule.”

4

Conclusions

The survey’s target group was companies in 25 European countries (Figure 3), that work within the sawn timber processing industry or that work within trading and building and therefore are customers of sawn timber processing industries. The survey had a total number of 1092 respondents in 23 countries, of which 772 respondents in 20 countries could be used for analysis. The survey covers most of the European countries, which are divided in five regions: the British Isles, the Nordic Countries, Central Europe, Eastern Europe and the Mediterranean Countries. The data are not necessarily representative of the European forestry industry, but they do yield some insights about practices related to quality control in the European wood processing industries. The research statements listed in the introduction are the bases for these conclusions. As suggested there, the statements are adapted to fit a description of an ideal future scenario.

Report COST

120

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

Working Group 1 (Scanning for wood properties): A) Forest enterprises and wood industries have expectations how scanning techniques can contribute/help to get the most value out of the round wood resource available in Europe. B)

The available scanning techniques for round wood and sawn timber are sufficiently established in the grading operations and production processes along the wood supply chain to get the highest value out of the resource and to make the production process most efficient.

This part of the questionnaire was completed only by a few respondents and there are no obvious reasons for the incomplete responses. The present results indicate that scanning techniques over and above machine strength grading are still fairly uncommon in the European wood processing industry. Respondents using or planning to use scanning techniques make up no more than 8 % of the respondents. Given the low response rate, it is difficult to draw conclusions from the data. The questionnaire was not distributed to forestry enterprises, and it is therefore not possible to draw any conclusions about the use of, and expectation towards, scanning by suppliers of raw material to the wood processing industry. The usage of scanning in grading operations is also fairly uncommon – most of the companies participating in the survey used visual grading. It is reasonable to believe that only a small number of producers have enough knowledge about the techniques and their benefits to have clear expectations. Working Group 2 (Moisture content and distortion): C)

European purchasers of kiln dried timber have a clear perception of quality features (moisture content, distortion, discolouration) and know how these quality features can be influenced by the producers of kiln dried timber.

D) A harmonised concept for assessment and controlling of drying quality (moisture content, case hardening, distortion, discolouration) exists and is widely used throughout Europe for satisfying the expectations of the users of kiln dried sawn timber. Purchasers of kiln dried timber are according to the survey either wood/timber traders or building/construction/design companies. They are considered as customers by the sawmilling and wood processing industries. The customers generally focus on the importance of a few quality parameters for their products. The results show that most customers have a clear perception of which quality parameters that matter and frequently specify their requirements as a part of the contract when ordering timber products. In particular, the customers focus on twist distortion, strength and strength classes as well as moisture content. These parameters mainly describe the quality of structural timber. Nearly all companies

Report COST

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

121

also perform some kind of visual inspection. Accordingly, it can be concluded that customers have a perception of quality features in their field. The questionnaire did not include questions to customers that could be used to evaluate whether customers know how producers can make use of drying to influence the quality. Producers do in general have poor knowledge about how the quality parameters the customers require can be influenced in the production processes (cf. Kliger 2010). Still most processing companies perform some kind of quality control. Most of them perform visual inspection; random sampling and measurements are also frequently carried out. Moisture content is measured by most of the companies, and it is mainly done by the traditional resistance or conductance method. For specification of the moisture content in contracts, mostly a plus/minus interval or a range is used. Regarding the moisture content, a kind of harmonised concept for assessment and control can therefore be observed, but this harmonised concept is not advanced. Allowable degrees of case hardening or acceptable limits for deformation or distortion are seldom applied in the processing industry. Few customers make claims related to discolouration. This could indicate that there actually is a kind of harmonised concept regarding discolouration used in the industry. The contacts used when problems with the colour occur are for all types of producers mainly the kiln manufacturer, colleagues in neighbouring companies and research institutes or universities. But the importance of these three is different for the different types of producers. Summarised, a harmonised concept for assessment and control of drying quality can be observed in parts. Working Group 3 (Strength, stiffness and appearance grading): E)

The standard for stress-graded timber matches user requirements.

F)

User requirements are consistent across Europe.

G) Downgrading of structural timber varies according to 1) grader technology, 2) softwood/hardwood species, 3) grade produced and 4) end-user/customer. This part of the questionnaire was completed by only a relatively small number of the respondents. In particular, the respondents did not complete all questions, and it is therefore difficult to draw robust conclusions from the results, and correspondingly the research questions are only partly addressed. Assuming that the missing responses indicate that the respective topic is irrelevant for the respondent, it can be argued that the topic of grading timber products is of less importance for the processing industry than drying-related issues. According to the results, grading is mainly done visually and accordingly, mostly visible parameters lead to rejection or downgrading. The visible parameters are also more important to the customers than the mechanical parameters. Among the mechanical parameters, strength and strength grades are most important. These results Report COST

122

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

indicate that there is a kind of congruency in producers’ and customers’ requirements. The customers’ requirements are generally consistent across Europe’s building and construction industries. Visible parameters are more important than the mechanical in the five regions that were examined. There are minor differences in the importance of the mechanical parameters between regions. Mechanical parameters are apparently more important to companies from Central Europe and the British Isles. Most of the customers are satisfied with the quality of received products despite some small deviations, and therefore it can be concluded that the customers’ requirements generally are met by the producers’ standard, although most producers do not grade their products or did not answer the questions. If grading is applied by the producers, the reasons for downgrading are generally the same in softwood and hardwood production and in primary, secondary and integrated production sectors. Task Group (construction): H) Customer satisfaction is well communicated backwards in chain. I)

Important grading parameters vary from standards to producers, traders and end-users. I1) Do priorities according to producers match priorities according to end-users? I2) What is the potential for improving properties of wood products through grading standards, processing, silviculture? I3) Is production conducted according to standards?

J)

User requirements are consistent for different products. J1) Functional requirements set by traders are significantly different from requirements set by builders.

The important parameters for customers, both trading and building companies, are the visible parameters, i.e. distortion, discolouration or mould and others; such as knots, cracks and wane. In addition to the visible parameters, the moisture content is considered important as well as strength and strength classes. Quality control regarding these parameters is performed by most of the companies. Most companies in both customer groups are satisfied with the moisture content and the colour. Traders are also satisfied with the parameters of distortion and knots, while building companies are slightly less satisfied. In general, the customers are satisfied with the quality of the products they receive and see the timber industry capable of delivering the right quality. But most companies have experienced

Report COST

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

123

quality that does not meet their requirements and have then sent the timber back to the producers. The communication of the customers’ requirements and satisfaction back to the producers might be interrupted in some fields. Most producers measure and observe the moisture content. Discolouration is seldom a cause for claims from customers. And most producers also look for help if problems with colour occur. Moisture content and colour are important parameters to customers, and most of them are also satisfied with these. Here, the communication seems to be adequate and the priorities of the two parts match each other. Producers do also generally consider the visible parameters, which are important to the customers, more important causes for rejection or downgrading. However, when it comes to distortion, the customers are less satisfied, but the producers do not seem to pay great attention to these parameters or even have enough knowledge about how these can be influenced in production. They rather are satisfied with their product quality regarding distortion. Here lies a potential for improving the quality of timber products and the customers’ satisfaction. This may be achieved by improving the communication between customers and producers and instructing producers in issues of distortion. It would also be interesting to know why traders are generally more satisfied with the parameters of distortion and knots than building companies. Do they not know about the importance of these parameters and therefore accept a poorer quality regarding these parameters, or do they have more knowledge and connections about where to obtain the better quality? In first case, which is more likely to be true because it is the same product that building companies then obtain from traders, the communication between building and trading should be improved. Otherwise, the requirements of trading and of building companies are generally the same despite some small differences. The results show that the production of timber products is conducted more traditionally than along advanced lines. Standards in form of applying strength classes and CE-marking of products are seldom used, if the high number of respondents who did not answer is to be so interpreted. Potential for improving lies in an increased usage of grading, not least since customers require strength graded timber products. CE-marking of the products would be of interest especially to traders, since they often obtain their materials in international markets, and CE-marking facilitates at least European trading. Knots and other parameters that are influenced by the growth of the trees; such as slope of grain, compression wood and wood density, are fields where a certain potential for improving lies in silviculture and/or in documentation and traceability along the wood supply chain from the forest to the end-user.

Report COST

124

5

Norsk Treteknisk Institutt

References •

Bysheim, K. (2009). Minutes: COST E53 Task Group meeting, Oslo, and attachment with research questions

•

CEI-Bois (2006). Roadmap 2010. A presentation at Global Vision 2006

•

Groves, R.M. et al (2004). Survey Methodology. Wiley series in survey methodology. New Jersey: Wiley & Sons, Inc.

•

Kliger, I.R. (2010). Timber quality for the construction industry. Extended abstract for final conference of COST Action E53 in Edinburgh

•

Teischinger, A. et al. (2005). Memorandum of Understanding of the COST Action E53 and Technical Annex

Report COST