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

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 （Ep. the ultrasonic wave modulus of elasticity, Ems, the stress wave modulus of elasticity and El, 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 Ep, Em, Er 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.

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

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. Foundation project: This paper was supported by “Wood-inorganic Restoration Material” in “Technique Introduction and Innovation of Bio-macromolecule New Material” of Introducing Overseas Advanced Forest Technology Innovation Program of China (“948” Innovation Project, Number: 2006-4-C03) Biography: LIANG Shan-qing (1977–), male, Ph.D. candidate, Research Institute of Wood Industry, Chinese Academy of Forestry, Beijing 100091, P.R. China.