The relative merits of field tests versus laboratory tests for evaluating wood preservatives are discussed. Many of the problems involved in interpretation of the results are similar for both types of test. One major problem is to select field sites or laboratory tests that are representative for the practical use of treated timber in ground contact. Decay tests with treated wood in unsterile soils in the laboratory have been found to provide results after a relatively short time. Specific weaknesses of preservative formulations against certain decay forms can be observed at an early stage, if the soils are selected to provide maximal decay hazard for different decay forms. One conclusion is that field tests should not exclude laboratory tests and vice versa.

Download document (838 kb)
free for the members of IRG. Available if purchased.

Purchase this document