Characterization of Wood Strands From Young, Small-Diameter Douglas-Fir and Western Hemlock Trees
Keywords:Douglas-fir, western hemlock, juvenile wood, wood strands, mechanical properties, tensile properties
AbstractTensile properties of strands processed from small-diameter Douglas-fir and western hemlock trees grown on the Washington coast were analyzed and effects of location within the tree on properties was examined. Reduction factors for strand properties relative to small, clear solid wood specimen properties were determined by correlating strand properties to previously examined small, clear solid wood specimen properties from the same set of trees. These reductions can be assumed to be damage reduction factors that could help in understanding the expected reduction in tensile or flexure property values from testing solid wood specimens to estimate strand tensile properties. The reduction factors ranged between 0.62 and 0.70 for Douglas-fir and 0.79 and 0.82 for western hemlock for the modulus and were approximately 0.46 for both Douglas-fir and western hemlock for strand tensile strength properties. Measured and calculated strand properties, based on transformation equations, will provide needed values for constructing constitutive relationships when modeling strand-based composites. These properties can also be estimated based on solid wood test specimens if necessary.
Alteyrec J, Zhang SY, Cloutier A, Ruel J-C (2005) Influence of stand density on ring width and wood density at different sampling heights in black spruce (Picea mariana [Mill.] B.S.P.). Wood Fiber Sci 37(1):83-94.nBarnes D (2000) An integrated model of the effect of processing parameters on the strength properties of oriented strand wood products. Forest Prod J 50(11/12):33-42.nBarrett JW (1995) Regional silviculture of the United States. 3rd edition. John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York, NY. 643 pp.nBendtsen BA (1978) Properties of wood from improved and intensely managed trees. Forest Prod J 28(10):61-78.nBurdon RD, Kibblewhite RP, Walker JC, Megraw RA, Evans R, Cown DJ (2004) Juvenile versus mature wood: A new concept, orthogonal to corewood versus outerwood, with special reference to Pinus radiate and P. taeda. Forest Sci 50(8):399-415.nCave ID, Walker JCF (1994) Stiffness of wood in fastgrown plantation softwoods and the influence of microfibril angle. Forest Prod J 44(5):43-48.nDebell DS, Singleton R, Gartner BL, Marshall DD (2004) Wood density of young-growth western hemlock: Relation to ring age, radial growth, stand density, and site quality. Can J Res 34:2433-2442.nEvans R., Ilic J (2001) Rapid prediction of wood stiffness from microfibril angle and density. Forest Prod J 51: 53-57.nForintek Canada Corp (2001) Second-growth western hemlock Product yields and attributes related to stand density. Special Publication No. SP-41. Forintek Canada Corp., Vancouver, BC, Canada. 128 pp.nGartner BL, North EM, Johnson GR, Singleton R (2002) Effects of live crown on vertical patterns of wood density and growth in Douglas-fir. Can J Res 32(3): 439-447.nGeimer RL, Mahoney RJ, Loehnertz PJ, Meyer RW (1985) Influence of processing-induced damage on strength of flakes and flakeboards. Res Pap FPL-RP-463. USDA For Serv Forest Prod Lab, Madison, WI. 15 pp.nGroom L, Mott L, Shaler S (2002) Mechanical properties of individual southern pine fibers, Part I. Determination and variability of stress-strain curves with respect to tree height and juvenility. Wood Fiber Sci 34(1):14-27.nHaygreen JG, Bowyer JL (1996) Wood science and forest products—An introduction. 3rd ed. Iowa State University Press, Ames, IA. 484 pp.nJahan-Latibari A (1982) The response of aspen flakes and flakeboard to flake surface modifications. PhD dissertation, Washington State University, Pullman, WA. 135 pp.nJones RM (1999) Mechanics of composite materials. 2nd ed. Taylor & Francis, Philadelphia, PA.nJozsa LA, Munro BD, Gordon JR (1998) Basic wood properties of second-growth western hemlock. Ministry of Forestry, B.C., Forest Practices Branch, Victoria, BC, Canada. Special Publication SP-38. 51 pp.nJozsa LA, Richards J, Johnson SG (1989) Relative density. Pages 5-22 in RM Kellogg, ed. Second growth Douglasfir: Its management and conversion for value. Special Publication No. SP-32. Forintek Canada Corp, Vancouver, BC, Canada.nKennedy RW (1995) Coniferous wood quality in the future: Concerns and strategies. Wood Sci Technol 29(1995): 321-338.nKennedy RW, Warren WG (1969) Within-tree variation in physical and chemical properties of Douglas-fir. FAO Second World Consul. on For. Tree Breeding. FO-FTB-69-4/4. 20 pp.nKing JE (1966) Site index curves for Douglas-fir in the Pacific Northwest. Weyerhaeuser Company Forestry Research Center, Centralia, WA. Forestry Paper No. 8. 49 pp.nKoehler A (1955) Guide to determining slope of grain in lumber and veneer. Forest Products Laboratory Report 1585. Madison, WI.nKrahmer RL (1966) Variation of specific gravity in hemlock trees. Tappi 49(5):227-229.nLangum CE (2007) Characterization of Pacific Northwest softwoods for wood composites production. MS thesis, Washington State University, Pullman, WA. 121 pp.nLangum CE, Yadama V, Lowell EC (2009) Physical and mechanical properties of young-growth Douglas-fir and western hemlock from western Washington. Forest Prod J 59(11/12):37-47.nLarson PR, Kretschmann DE, Clark A III, Isebrands JG (2001) Formation and properties of juvenile wood in southern pines: A synopsis. Gen Tech Rep FPL-GTR-129. USDA For Serv Forest Prod Lab, Madison, WI. 42 pp.nMahoney RJ (1980) Physical changes in wood particles induced by the particleboard hot-pressing operation. Pages 21-3-223 in T Maloney, ed. Proc Fourteenth Washington State University International Symposium on Particleboard, 2-5 April 1980, Pullman, WA.nMegraw RA (1986) Douglas-fir wood properties. Pages 81-96 in CD Oliver, DP Hanley, and JA Johnson, eds. Douglas-fir: Stand management for the future. Contribution No. 55. University of Washington, College of Forest Resources, Institute of Forest Resources, Seattle, WA.nPrice EW (1976) Determining tensile properties of sweetgum veneer flakes. Forest Prod J 26(10):50-53.nSanio K (1872) On the size of the wood cells of the Scotch pine (Pinus silvestris). Jahrbucher für Wissenschaftliche Botanik 8:401-420.nSuddarth KS, Bender DA (1995) Statistical fundamentals for wood engineering. Wood Design Focus 6(1):3-12.nTrendelenburg R (1936) Variations in the density of important coniferous timbers, due to locality, habitat and differences in individual trees. University of Oxford, Imperial Forestry Institute, Oxford, UK. 10 pp.nWellwood RW, Smith JHG (1962) Variation in some important qualities of wood from young Douglas-fir and hemlock trees. Research Paper No. 50. Faculty of Forestry, University of BC, Canada. 15 pp.nWiley KN (1978) Site index tables for western hemlock in the Pacific Northwest Weyerhaeuser For. Pap.17. Weyerhaeuser Company, Western Forestry Research Center, Centralia, WA. 28 pp.nYadama V (2002) Characterization and modeling of oriented strand composites. PhD dissertation, Washington State University, Pullman, WA. 193 pp.nYadama V, Wolcott MP (2006) Elastic properties of hot-pressed aspen strands. Wood Fiber Sci 38(4): 742-750.nYang JL, Evans R (2003) Prediction of MOE of eucalypt wood from microfibril angle and density. Holz Roh Werkst 61:449-452.n
The copyright of an article published in Wood and Fiber Science is transferred to the Society of Wood Science and Technology (for U. S. Government employees: to the extent transferable), effective if and when the article is accepted for publication. This transfer grants the Society of Wood Science and Technology permission to republish all or any part of the article in any form, e.g., reprints for sale, microfiche, proceedings, etc. However, the authors reserve the following as set forth in the Copyright Law:
1. All proprietary rights other than copyright, such as patent rights.
2. The right to grant or refuse permission to third parties to republish all or part of the article or translations thereof. In the case of whole articles, such third parties must obtain Society of Wood Science and Technology written permission as well. However, the Society may grant rights with respect to Journal issues as a whole.
3. The right to use all or part of this article in future works of their own, such as lectures, press releases, reviews, text books, or reprint books.