How strong is plywood, MDF, OSB, particle board vs. solid wood
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 21 ก.ย. 2022
- Testing some samples of plywood, Baltic birch (Russian birch), MDF, particle board and OSB. Also testing these against pine and birch.
More about my wood strength testing machine at:
woodgears.ca/wood_strength/ - แนวปฏิบัติและการใช้ชีวิต
![[LIVE] : ONE ลุมพินี 68 | คู่เอก "พระจันทร์ฉาย vs โจนาธาน"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/F3IM3w-XchI/mqdefault.jpg)
Let this be a lesson to you, folks. If Matthias could have found a cheaper way to make those bandsaw, he would have!! 😆😆
I'm still kind of amazed that you can make a bandsaw out of mostly pine.
,👍👍
Makeshift Osb bandsaw 🤣🤣🤣
Can i get comparison chart
Where a bandsaw frame needs rigidity I think the test may have just as well been done measuring not fracturing but deflection to 3mm. Nice video as always Mattias.
I worked in a lab where we tested particle boards and OSBs and there are big differences among the different types that are produced. Some boards are 2-3x times stronger than others when it comes to bending. We also tested vertical ripping, surface strength, volume changes after boil etc.
Love these test videos!
I was waiting for the results for crossgrain baltic birch ply as I was forced to use a 21mm sheet that way for my current speaker project. No-one had the sheets in long grain.
I am impressed by the strength of your wooden gears
I just realized, that these videos all would make a perfectly fine article/paper. :) So much scintific work behind that.
keep up the great content, Matthias.
A paper would in many ways be easier, cause it's just the facts. For a video, there is the added challenge of presenting it so that people find it moderately entertaining.
@@matthiaswandel youtube comments are also (surprisingly) less toxic than academic ones 🤣
Thank you for all the work you put into the demonstration. I found this very informative.
What a good comparison and review! 'Mazing Matthias! Always impressed by your ingenuity and technical prowess! 👍
👍👍👍
MDF, particle board and OSB are also referred as Wood Baloney :D
aka the “hotdog” of the lumber world.
I refer to them as fire hazards... I tell anybody doing construction for me that if they bring any of those materials on site, they will catch fire overnight.
The best definition I've seen for MDF is "GLIT". That is, Glue, and Sh*t.
Are they? What a stupid expression
Mmm... Baloney...
Just when I thought you are finished, you pull up more samples. Awesome 🙂 Thank You!
Very informative! Thanks for taking time to test this and report to us!
Fantastic testing, Matthias! Thanks a bunch! 😃
Stay safe there with your family! 🖖😊
My takeaway is that you *could* build a very strong bandsaw out of Baltic Birch, and maybe even just using Baltic Birch in strategic locations would work well, but for the cost, Pine is plenty strong.
I'm very impressed with the strength of pine. Grain selection and knots can really make or break a project.
Nice test and test setup. Thanks for sharing. Amazed by the pines strength
Thank you for doing this, this will be a good future reference to see where cheaper materials can be used.
Thanks for a confirmation of my feeling about those strength ..!
I recently got some 1/4" 2x8' sheets of pressed hardboard that is dry-erase on one side and chalkboard on the other from the cull lumber section of my local House Station. 70% off, some rough edges but otherwise good. I've been using it for drawer dividers, but the dry-erase side is very smooth and hard like melamine, so router table top, blower impeller disks and cabinet doors you can put notes on. Big chunks of Masonite too, almost a whole sheet of 3/4" for $7.
Most plywood failures I've had were from poor quality control of gluing the layers. Thanks for the video. Now I need to find a supplier of Baltic Birch plywood near me.
personally I think you’re wonderful too. I love watching your stuff. You’re one of the best artisans I’ve ever seen. Wish I had your talent. Keep it up man I love it.
Great video and test results. I am sort of blown away at the number of comments claiming the results are flawed as so many people do not understand the relationship of the geometry of the piece and how that relates to stress and strain under bending. The methods used in the video to normalize the results are correct from what I could see. Stiffness dictates total strain under a loading condition and the failure of the piece in this test is dictated by the compressive and tensile strength of the extreme fibers of the test piece. Great video.
I love these videos with quantified tests of different things.
Minor nitpick: I am pretty sure the strength against bending is proportional to the cube of the thickness, not the square as Matthias suggests at about 3:40. So a twice as thick piece would be eight times stronger (assuming a homogeneous material). Further reading can be found e.g. under "Second moment of area" and "List of second moments of area" in Wikipedia for anyone interested.
Stiffness varies with thickness cubed. Fail strength with thickness squared. Note how the birch samples lined of different thickness lined up so close with the square law adjustment
@@matthiaswandel for those that want the equations: stress = M*y/I, where I = (1/12)*base*height^3. For 3-point bending, M = (1/4)*Force*length. Setting y = height/2, stress = Ultimate Tensile Strength and rearranging gives:
F = (2/3)*(1/L)*UTS*b*h^2
Thank you for testing and for provinding evidence 👍
I love these strength test videos. Ever thought about doing on to test tenon depth strength?
Excellent video as always! 👍
It's great to see, that Baltic birch playwood is so strong.. No wonder about price and that lots of it is going to export..
A lot of people think strength is a cubic because of I = (1/12)*width*thickness^3. But they're forgetting the stress equation (stress = M*y/I) has a thickness term (y = thickness/2) that cancels out and makes it a square law.
When you substitute M = (1/4)*Force*Length and stress = Ultimate Tensile Strength, you get:
F[max] = (2/3)*(1/L)*UTS*w*t^2
yes, so many comments saying its with thickness cubed. So annoying.
great video with results pretty much what I expected.
Another very interesting comparison test video.
Not far from where I used to live was a school furniture manufacturer, and they got some 10 ply Russian plywood to make the furniture from and it was nice stuff. I made a bookcase from some scraps, and it was really nice to work with. It was 3/4" or 19mm, and was a very nice product. It would be interesting if you could test some of that.
Watch the video. I tested baltic birch.
Really cool to see the data.
Clearly presented, thank you for posting this.
Matthias always trying to satisfy his curiosity. Well done!
I wish to het back my incredible focus that I see you have to do these maschines and tests.
Great test. Thanks for sharing.
Matthias doing the lord's work. Interesting test!
In mechanical engineering stiffness is usually more important than ultimate strength so I think that would be a more interesting measurement. Usually once a structure is made stiff enough, the strength is more than enough. Of course wood is not isotropic and is weaker in compression than in tension, so there are some applications where this is less likely to apply.
I think this test is also going in the wrong direction. The forces would be going across the length and width of the boards in the structure rather than through its thickness.
Wrong
@@bobojenkins5805 well when you put it like that who could argue....
Exactly. Using any wood product as a structural member, the stiffness is in the long axis. You don’t use a 2X lying flat. Think about glulam beams. I really don’t see the point of testing like Mathias did.
Ever played around with edge ply? I used some cement form work support stuff to build a desk and it's super strong. It's all single direction so I cut it into strips, then sandwiched them together like an enormous butchers block. The strips were super flexible sideways but had almost no play on a vertical plane.
You can actually buy that.
Didn't have any handy
A very good test!!!
I am not sure I am using the right words since I am not a native english speaker..
The material physics is pretty straight forward. The strength of your probes rise with the thickness^3. Also one side is in tension while the opposite side is in compression. This means the middle fibres carry no load (which is over simplified!). Also this means with plywood the inner grains may lay in the wrong direction, but this doesn't matter much since only the most outer ones carry the load.
For semis you want things to be light but heavy duty; best things therefore are sandwhich panels; outer layer of sheetmetal (steel or aluminium) and in between light (and thus weak) foam of some kind. (maybe you see the similarity to plywood)
fun fact: car springs can hold significally longer with the right paintwork; since it is always on the outside, it may carry quite a lot of the load if it adheres good enough and the material properties of the paint are good.
You should be proud of your English. Thanks for sharing your knowledge.
Stiffness rises with thickness cubed, strength with thickness squared. The solid birch samples, all from the same board, showed how consistent that worked out. If I'd used the wrong equation, my results would have been all over the place
Engineer here (Mechanical and Electrical). The strength and stiffness of a beam is mainly in the faces experiencing the tensile and compressive forces. That's the reason for "torsion box" construction. The strength and stiffness is the 3rd power of the beam depth and proportional to the width. I've always wondered why Mathias has always used solid frames for his bandsaws instead of slightly larger hollow boxes. If I was to build a wooden bandsaw, that's what I'd do with good plywood face grain running in the primary stress directions. Personally, I'd use tubular steel sections.
Matthias was right, double the thickness equals 4x the strength (not 2^3).
Wood elves are allergic to steel.
I keep seeing comments about it being proportional with thikness cubed. This is true if you keep the member square, for example, so doubling thickness also doubles the width. But if you only double the thickness, it's squared. Steel is a bad example though cause you can double the thickness of a hollow member but not the wall thickness. Then the it will be less than 4x as strong.
@@matthiaswandel Probably a mixup because stiffness is proportional to the thickness cube. Stress is proportional to the thickness square : Stress = M*c/I = (F/2)*(L/2)*(h/2)/(w*h^3/12) = 3*F*L/(2*w*h^2).
Maintaining the full tension strength of the wood all along the outer part of the 'C' shaped main beam would not be possible with plywood. I think what might make sense is building it in low-cost soft wood with a radiused shape, and then laminating some high quality knot free layers along the tension pathway on the outside. Or, for that matter, just put one or two layers of fiberglass tape on the main load paths.
Also, would be interesting to test different joints strength in plywood - butt, lap, dowels, screws, etc
Not really, as already with this test to some degree you are comparing apples to pears. Plywood is made mainly for dimensional stability, so unless real wood which with moisture will swell and shrink mainly in one direction (perpendicular to the grain) the layers in different directions compensate for that. When you look into construction, where structural strength is required you will find either solid timber beams, or glue laminations, but we are talking about completely different dimensions here and using certain cuts of wood to reduce impact of grain and get beams exceeding dimensions you can just get from a mill today, among other things.
Plywood is plenty strong if used for cabinets, or as sheathing as intended. Same with OSB, which is just a cheaper alternative creating something with properties of both plywood and particle board.
Particle board, I don´t know if that is actually good for anything other than cheap (in the worst sense of the word) cabinets and one time packaging.
MDF, by reducing the particle size again has superior qualities over particle board. less compressible, more rigid, easier to coat/paint. MDF also due to its high density is quite good for speakers.
So except in case used as sheathing, none of those boards are intended to be really structural. They are solid enough as floors and walls on joists and studs, especially on walls they provide in combination a lot of strength in one pane. They may work for cabinets, if used right. But using the example of a bandsaw, most people may already be surprised that a saw without a metal frame is stiff enough at all. But in this case, with right dimensions and taking into account the grain direction, it gets kind of structural and solid wood or glued laminations are the way to go. An enigneered box frame made out of plywood would likely work as well looking at rigidity. (just not sure if it would hold up).
I love to get those numbers. Thank you
nice to see these results, being from the Baltics :)
awsome information!
Cool test. I know it would be a lot of work but another interesting test is how the dirrernt material respond to water.
Great video
I love your practical knowledge mixed with programing. You're what every maker should be. A series of Venn diagrams working together.
Yes to Venn diagrams
Thanks for the video!
this is some esxcellent and useful data
Great video👌
I'm very curious about shapes of the stress/strain curves and the Young's Modulus.
I'd also test plywood strength by pushing along the layer lines as this is how the plywood frame wood have been constructed - pieces of plywood glued back-to-front, not right-to-left of the frame.
Wouldn't the most important strength for a bandsaw application be within the plane of the plywood? I didn't see that tested. Essentially, I'd be curious to see how plywood would fare in that device when rotated 90° around the long axis.
I would love to see that, too.
I was thinking exactly the same thing.
Thirded. No wait, Fourthed. Yeah, I'm not sure his tester can take the stresses, but in-plane (good nomenclature, I couldn't think of the right term) testing of the plywood is what's needed.
Matthias, I work in a materials lab. Send me the samples and I can test them.
Yeah, I mean in building plywood/OSB is used for its shear strength (and of course that it's awfully difficulty to get 4x8 sheets of solid pine!).
No, it's bending of the column. When the blade is tensioned, the far side of the column is actually under almost as much tension as the near side is under compression, because the bending moment dominates.
I've found the engineering lesson that is most relevant to woodworking is bending moment of inertia. Whenever I have to use a weaker material for something critical, I orient it so the bending moment of inertia is maximized
Matthias might consider using the beam stress equation Mc/I and comparing stresses instead of factoring loads around. He's using an interesting method of normalizing results, but it's not exactly the same as what you'd see in a standard three-point bending test. Also I'd like to see a tensile strength test as well but that requires a different test setup. Big props for generating your own material strength data! That's amazing dedication.
Wood in tension is so much stronger than in other orientations that there's little use for knowing tensile strength.
@@Bob_Adkins only if you're using the same size wood everywhere. If you made an A-frame from framing pine or LVL but made the bottom member from dowel, then knowing the tensile strength will allow you to use the smallest dowel diameter.
@@toolscientist I know what you're saying, but wood in tension is so much stronger that if you made it smaller, there would be no reliable or practical way to fasten it. So wood in tension will always be WAY larger than it needs to be. That said, not much wood is used purely in tension in normal construction.
@@Bob_Adkins a through hole and thin dowel glued in will be strong enough at a certain diameter to hole length ratio. But yeah, you need fairly specific examples that aren't often used in reality, so your comment is right in 98% of cases 😉
For a rectangular cross section, Mc/I reduces to 6M/bt^2. This is where he's getting his factor. If you double the thickness, you reduce the stress by 4.
The strength of the solid wood may depend on which way the growth rings run (whether the wood is plainsawn or quartersawn). This occurred to me when another comment mentioned making up beams of plywood or OSB so the plyies are parallel to the stress. This would reduce the tendency to delaminate like many of the failed samples did.
On the other hand this is not very useful because of the trouble of using any built-up wood in a project like your bandsaw.
Thanks for all the testing . . .
Should we visit are favourite wood suppliers cluching you graph while deciding what to buy ? 🙂
Have you substantiated the width correction factor?
Interesting results. Plywood certainly has its uses since it's not completely useless across the grain like solid wood, but good to see a comparison.
Look at the three birch samples of different thicknesses and how close they lined up after correcting.
I think that if you put inner layer with the plywood cut in diagonal it would be stronger. And if you added some fiber glass roving and used a quality urethane glue with good curing pressure.
I suspect these are tedious to record, but they are entertaining to watch :)
Nice vid, thanks!
Thank you!
Hey Matthias, thanks for the test! this is quite useful!
I have two questions:
- Does it makes any difference if you rotate the plywood 90 degrees?
- I see that you are measuring the total strength, but what about the stiffness of the material (young's modulus)? For building machines, that's probably more important than the total strength
It seems like you have tested the plywood only with pressure perpendicular to the layer lines. I would love to also see a comparison that is in line with the layer lines.
Good test, about what I expected out of these samples. Srpuce? Cute, must be a variation of Spruce. ;-)
Materials like playwood and OSB are used in construction for taking loads ALONG the material - stretching - in shear walls, not across it like in beams as you test it
Can you do a test with for example pine 10mm thick and take the readings when it brakes. Then put two similar pieces on top of each other and take the readings. And finally a third set of similar pieces but glued together.
Hmmm.. technically if you consider bending dominant behavior (planar strain profile) with a maximum stress failure criteria, the strength of the section is proportional to cube of the section's height. Given that extreme wood fibers usually *break* first, this is not a bad assumption (a linear strain profile) - this is what we call *allowable stress design* method. For a material that *yields* and has a large inelastic range of strain (i.e. it is ductile), the strength is proportional to the square of the section height (but the strength comes out as a larger number for the same section as well).
Matthias, have you ever experimented with making hardboard out of cardboard. There’s a lot of Amazon and Walmart shipping boxes lying around these days. I wanted to see what could be done with the stuff besides discarding or burning it.
I soaked six small pieces in cheap yellow carpenters glue and compressed it firmly. It produced a very tough material. I also coated it with glue and it produced a durable finish. It has a lot of possibilities.
I've experimented with laminating cardboard with fiberglass and either Titebond III or high quality epoxy. You can make some strong and durable composites out of it.
Sounds horrifically expensive. But maybe that's your art form?
You should do pine vs steel :) Might need a bigger test aparatus!
This is very interesting Matthias. It's a common technique in shelf-making (for example with book cases) to reinforce a shelf from deflection by rabbeting a piece of solid wood and gluing it to the front edge of the shelf. This is supposed to make a plywood or MDF shelf less likely to bow from the weight of the books. I wonder how a plywood or MDF shelf prepared in this way would compare to just a solid piece of wood?
Most of the support will come from the solid piece of wood, cause that is also a lot stiffer. Basically, the stiffest material takes most of the load, even if the stiffest material was not the strongest
@@matthiaswandel this reminds me of a horizontal dough mixer I used to have to work on that was duel belt drive (one belt on either side). The driven center shaft was far stiffer torsionally that the drive shaft, and since the power was applied to the drive shaft way off center, one of the two heavy duty timing belts took the lions share, if not all of the load. It was also a nightmare to balance the two belts since their relationship to each other changed at different loads.
@@matthiaswandel Makes a lot of sense. I just watched a video over on Rob Cosman's channel where he created a double mortise and tenon joint. In that video he suggested that having 2 tenons would give the joint better ability to resist leveraging on the joint than a single tenon would (even if the sum of the widths of the two tenons and the gap in between them is the same as the width of a single tenon). If this is true, then I'm not sure why -- maybe doubling the number of shoulders is superior at resisting racking even if it sacrifices some glue surface? What are your thoughts?
Perhaps you can test some LVL (laminated veneer lumber) and LSL (laminated strand lumber) to compare with your other samples.
don't have any.
This is video I've been looking for, thank you man! Forgive my ignorance, but how do you tell grain orientation in OSB? I always assumed it to be chaotic random grain orientation
apparently, there is more grain along the length of the sheet. Though once you cut a square out of it, I don't know what you'd do.
Interesting. Baltic birch seems worth it for strength and stability.
depends on how critical those characteristics are to your project.
Very good
"The ancient Egyptians and Greeks cut wood thinly and glued it together in layers with the grain in perpendicular directions as fine wood was in short supply. This is believed to have been done purely for cosmetic and economical purposes but it turned out to be a great alternative to pure wood as it reduced flex, making it a versatile building material."
"One can thus presume that rotary lathe plywood manufacturing was an established process in France in the 1860s. Plywood was introduced into the United States in 1865 and industrial production there started shortly after. In 1928, the first standard-sized 4 ft by 8 ft"
As a child I built a slingshot out of particle board, because it was the first chunk of wood I found in my dads shop. Shortly afterwards, I learned that particle board is quite weak 😄
you know what would be cool? under the big reading on the top right putting a running updating maximum
for solid wood, flat or edge on are going to be the same, but for plywood I could see it being very different (don't know if it would be better or worse than flat plywood, but I expect it would be noticeably different)
Flat or on edge are way different for solid wood. As explained
Its more for plywood being more homogenous and less at risk from bending overtime than wood, not for the strenght if i think correctly. Also it is easier to buy a sheet of ply and then cut the shapes than buy wood and make ot i to shape.
Bending due to moisture changes (or improper drying of the wood), sure. But the plywood is more likely to bend from physical loads (ex., weight on a shelf).
Very interesting 👍
MDF definitely has a 'grain' similar to plywood. I suspect pushing on the side rather than the face may improve its strength some.
LOL WOT? Do you know what MDF is?
@@johncoops6897 Yes, it is compressed in its thickness when it is made. It seems that it creates more strength in the thickness direction than in either of the other directions. In other words, it is not an isotropic material like metal, it is a little more like wood, even though it has no visible grain.
@@CraigsWorkshop - MDF has "layers" but it doesn't have "grain".
@@johncoops6897 Thanks, though I did not say it had grain. I elaborated on the first half of TMMs comment, for anyone that didn't get the idea he was trying to get across. The second half of his comment, the main point in my mind, I agree with.
@@CraigsWorkshop - remember... I wasn't replying to you.
Everything in its place is good particle core will never fail if used properly. The same as solid wood and plywood everything has its use
Thank you very much for your video. I wanted to ask you if you can help me understanding cross grain vs long grain in OSB. What I have to pay attention? Thank you so much. Carlotta
Thanks for doing this so we dont have to !! Just give us some context here - what is the force applied in tensioning a blade on a 14" bandsaw ?
Out of curiosity, how do you adjust for the dimension of the solid birch? Do you assume force increases linearly with thickness?
For the answer, watch the video
While strength is important for many applications stiffness is even more important. As the testing machine records travel getting a stiffness chart should not be too difficult. May be in an follow up video?
It would be interesting to factor in cost! That often drives the choice!
That's what YOU need to do, because my costs are not your costs.
That's why we pay the big moolah for Baltic birch.
It also machines nicely and looks clean, but that wasn't tested here.
Also proves why you never make something that will receive force cross-grain, the strength of the pine was pitiful. This is something that 3d printing people should have learned by now as 3d printed objects are far stronger along the grain than cross-grain much like wood; all the time I see 3d prints in which the print orientation makes it receive force cross-grain.
what if the laminations were in the same direction...all long grain? curious about them pushing and pulling against the glue/epoxy...assuming they would be fighting against that.
Interesting!
The cross grain pine looks more like laminate. Like solid pine pieces glued together.
I would have really liked to see plywood with the plies at 45 degrees.
How does the stiffness compare? Looks like MDF should be pretty stiff among these? Which agrees well with some of its applications (stiffness, weight and damping, like for speaker boxes).
Regarding anisotropy, would be interesting if they made plywood with thicker core plys and thinner surface plys -- well, they usually do, but more like having veneer on top of a couple thick core plys. I mean like having several alternating layers of thin, yet quite strong material -- like, a coarse 1-3 ply pine core in the middle of 3-4 layers each side of Baltic Birch or the like. The core could be even weaker woods for that matter; it only needs to handle some compression keeping the outer layers from buckling, while the outer layers handle the bulk of the tension/compression load. Same concept as honeycomb- or foam-core fiberglass construction.
They probably don't for production cost / complexity reasons (hence Baltic Birch being thin layers all the way through); or the consistency makes it better suited to joinery too. And I don't suppose you'll be very interested in making your own plywood to test the idea, hah, but just a thought -- in particular, it's interesting that the cheap 5-ply is so much weaker across-grain, basically because the outer layers don't count for anything while the inner layers, bearing the load, are effectively so much shorter, like a 3-ply, 12mm or whatever, piece would do.
I seem to remember that MDF is used in speaker units because it is consistent throughout the board, which might have effect on acoustics. Companies tend to care about repeatability, and mdf provides consistent results.
MDF is used in speakers because it tends to be acoustically "dead" (non-resonant). It's also inexpensive and easy to machine. It's not particularly strong. And don't ever get it wet.
the DeHaviland Mosquito was constructed with a 3 layer plywood construction of a thin birch ply on the outsides and a thick balsawood core.
the modern equivalent for aircraft today would be glass fiber with a honyecomb core.
MDF is not stiff at all; it will deform easily if under transversal loads (ex., shelves) and will slowly lose its ability to return to the original shape. It's reasonably strong in the longitudinal direction (ex., vertical side panels).
Also, as mentioned above, will will swell up and delaminate as soon as it gets wet (unless you use moisture-resistant - typically green - MDF). Always seal the edges (ex., with diluted PVA glue) - and preferably the faces as well - if there's any chance that any liquid will get spilled on it.. Note that varnish and paint will only work until there's the slightest crack, and then water will get through and ruin the MDF. PVA, sealants and some primers will actually soak into the MDF and form a thin waterproof layer.
@@RFC-3514 Also a good point about creep -- this test only shows short-term deformation, but things can go differently over long time scales, and with temp/humidity cycling.
I recall reading something about people trying to save money buying OSB instead of plywood to shield their windows from a hurricane and regretting it because the strength is, as Matthias just demonstrated appalling when something comes hurting towards it.
I'm curious to know how you converted the force to a uniform thickness.
In theory it seems to be a simple scaling factor but in reality the stiffness in flexion (which is the engineering term for what you are measuring here) depends on the moment of inertia of the section of the boards, which for a rectangular section is (width*height^3)/12 if i remember correctly.
Scale by thickness squared, as explained in the video
You are correct that I = (1/12)*b*h^3, but there is another 'h' in the stress equation that cancels and makes it a square law. I showed the equations in another comment, but the final result is
F[max] = (2/3)*(1/L)*UTS*b*h^2
What about flex without breakage? If the forces involved aren't enough to break a material and stiffness is a primary concern in the application, then the material that is stiffer is the better choice even if it has a lower breaking point.
I didn't bother checking that, just gets the video too complicated. Still have the logs so I could calculate it afterwards.
All the more reason why sheathing a subfloor perpendicular to the joists is important.
I think if you laminated the baltic birch to the same thickness as the bandsaw solid wood frame I believe it would be stronger and less prone to twisting and seasonal movement.
For baltic birch, yes. But it would weigh more and cost a lot more, and only be slightly stronger
If I could afford enough Baltic birch to build a bandsaw, then I could buy a really nice bandsaw.