| Summary: | Traditional benchmark wood durability testing methods such as stake tests take many years to give conclusive results, and in-ground tests do not always indicate the efficacy of preservatives in above-ground situations. To find test methods that would shorten the time required for wood evaluation for above-ground end uses, a series of different types of accelerated durability tests were set up. Five types of test: ground proximity, two types of decking, flat panels and double layer, were reassessed after ten years to determine whether the decay rankings given to the various types of preservative had changed over the extended exposure period. Exposure conditions varied between tests, with ground proximity being close to ground, and the double layer test carried out in very wet conditions, while raised decking and flat panel tests were relatively dry. In all of these tests, the preservative retention was 25% of the normal H3 retention. The results indicated that the ground proximity tests gave the fastest and most reliable results. Flat panels contained the next highest decay rates, followed by ground-level decking, double layer and raised decking. The evaluation and comparison of these five test methods after ten years’ field exposure confirmed the trend and relative decay rate that was observed at four-year exposure. The use of a regression model for prediction showed a statistically significant overall relationship between decay scores in 2011 and 2017 (coefficient = 0.14 ± 0.07, d.f. = 345.7, t = 2.038, <i>p</i> = 0.042). When resistance to decay was compared between preservatives, copper-chrome arsenate (CCA)-treated pine and naturally durable spotted gum samples were in better conditions than pine treated with any of the other preservatives.
|
|---|
