Comparative study on three dynamic modulus of elasticity and static modulus of elasticity for Lodgepole pine lumber

Abstract

The dynamic and static modulus of elasticity (MOE) between bluestained and non-bluestained lumber of Lodgepole pine were tested and analyzed by using three methods of Non-destructive testing (NDT), Portable Ultrasonic Non-destructive Digital Indicating Testing (Pundit), Metriguard and Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) and the normal bending method. Results showed that the dynamic and static MOE of bluestained wood were higher than those of non-bluestained wood. The significant differences in dynamic MOE and static MOE were found between bulestained and non-bluestained wood, of which, the difference in each of three dynamic MOE (E _p, the ultrasonic wave modulus of elasticity, E _m, the stress wave modulus of elasticity and E _f, the longitudinal wave modulus of elasticity) between bulestained and non-bluestained wood arrived at the 0.01 significance level, whereas that in the static MOE at the 0.05 significance level. The differences in MOE between bulestained and non-bluestained wood were induced by the variation between sapwood and heartwood and the different densities of bulestained and non-bluestained wood. The correlation between dynamic MOE and static MOE was statistically significant at the 0.01 significance level. Although the dynamic MOE values of E _p, E _m, E _f were significantly different, there exists a close relationship between them (arriving at the 0.01 correlation level). Comparative analysis among the three techniques indicated that the accurateness of FFT was higher than that of Pundit and Metriguard. Effect of tree knots on MOE was also investigated. Result showed that the dynamic and static MOE gradually decreased with the increase of knot number, indicating that knot number had significant effect on MOE value.

Keywords

Lodgepole pine / Non-destructive testing / Dynamic modulus of elasticity / Static modulus of elasticity

References

[1] Ayarkwa J., Hirashima Y., Ando K., Sasaki Y. Monitoring acoustic emissions to predict modulus of rupture of finger-joints from tropical African hardwoods Wood and Fiber Science, 2001, 33(3): 450-464.

[2] Byrne, A., Uzunovic, A. 2000. Does beetle-killed lodgepole pine lack strength? Forintek Canada Corp [R]. Internal Report. Vancouver, BC.9p

[3] Cui Y., Zhang H., Sheng Wei. The study on stress grading for pinus sylvestris var. Mogonica based on transverse vibration method Forestry Machinery & Woodworking Equipment, 2005, 33(10): 24-28.

[4] GB1936.2-91. 1991. Method for determination of the modulus of elasticity in static bending of wood [s].

[5] Hu Y., Wang F., Liu Yixing. Nondestructive test of the dynamic deflection modulus of elasticity for particleboard Journal of Northeast Forestry University, 2001, 29(1): 9-11.

[6] Hu Y., Wang F., Liu Y., Tetsuya Nakao. Study on shear modulus of elasticity of plywood by vibration method China Wood Industry, 2001, 15(4): 12-14.

[7] Liu Z., Liu Y., Yu H., Yuan Junqi. Research on the dynamic modulus of elasticity measurement of lumber Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2005, 41(6): 126-131.

[8] Najafi S.K., Bucur V., Ebrahimi G. Materials letters elastic constants of particleboard with ultrasonic technique Materials Letters, 2005, 59(16): 2039-2046.

[9] Ross R.J., Zerbe J.I., Wang X., Green D.W., Pellerin R.F. Stress wave nondestructive evaluation of Douglas-fir peeler cores Forest Products Journal, 2005, 55(3): 90-94.

[10] Wang X., Ross R.J., Mclellan M., Barbour R.J., Erickson J.R., Forsman J.W., McGinnis G.D. Nondestructive evaluation on standing trees with a stress wave method Wood and Fiber Science, 2001, 33(4): 522-533.