## 3 Results and Discussion
### Edge Band Studies  
Edge banding, particularly melamine, has been found to improve the strength of corner joints in furniture, particularly in tension and compression tests [3]. This improvement in strength is further enhanced when using coated MDF with edge banding because it can increase the load-bearing capacity and service life of cabinets [18]. The use of rebated and covered edges in case furniture can further enhance the tension and compressive strength of corner joints [19]. However, [20], in their research on corner joints constructed with wood biscuits, found that the strength of corner joints was primarily derived from the edge gluing of the face and butt member rather than the glued biscuits. [PERSON] and [PERSON] [3] found that melamine-edge banding material provided better structural integration and higher strength compared to PVC and wood-veneer edge banding materials, with the positive role of its 0.4 mm edge banding on 18 mm particleboard of corner joints in case furniture. [PERSON] and [PERSON] [5] found that the type and thickness of the edge banding material can influence the bending and tensile strength of the particleboard, which in turn can affect the quality of different glued joints.  
Different methods can be found in the literature to investigate edge bonding quality: from a pull-off test in accordance with EN ISO 4624:2017 [21] to measure the force required to detach the edge band from the wood-based panel Dzincic and Palija [22] or EN 28510-1:2014 [23], which involves peeling of glued flexible and rigid specimens together at an angle of 90\({}^{\circ}\)[5]; or EN 311:2004 standard [24], which, among others, specifies assessing the surface soundness of coated wood-based panels and uncoated particle boards, used to determine the adhesion of the edge banding to the particleboard samples [25]; and up to the test on the peel strength of PVC edge bands on curved edge parts in accordance with Chinese standard QB/T3655 [26; 27]. The mentioned methods are illustrated in Figure 1.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Material** & **Advantages** & **Disadvantages** & **Use Cases** & **Key Insights** \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Aluminum} & \multirow{4}{*}{Modern, sleek appearance} & \multirow{4}{*}{\(\blacksquare\)} & Higher cost than & \multirow{4}{*}{\(\blacksquare\)} & Modern or \\  & & & plastic edges & & industrial-style \\  & & Excellent impact & & Requires specialized & & furniture \\  & & resistance & application & \(\blacksquare\) & Decorative \\  & & Lightweight and & & techniques & & furniture \\  & & corrosion-resistant & \(\blacksquare\) & Cold appearance may & \(\blacksquare\) & Areas requiring \\  & & & Durable and low & & not fit all design & \\  & & maintenance & & aesthetics & & high durability \\  & & & & \(\blacksquare\) & Some materials may & \\  & & & lack the flexibility & \(\blacksquare\) & & \\  & & textures, like on & & needed for profiled & \(\blacksquare\) & \\  & & panel surfaces. & & forms. & \(\blacksquare\) & Machines for soft \\  & & Ideal for profiled & & & and/or & production investment \\ Applications & & furniture edges & & costs due to special & & post-forming \\  & & & machines & & & selection, making them \\  & & & & Not applicable for & & & suitable for complex, \\  & & & curved panel edges & & & custom furniture. \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 2: _Cont._