Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T05:14:42.825Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Mechanical Characteristics of Historical Beams of Picea Abies Wood: Assessment by Ultrasound

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 May 2014

Javier Ramón Sotomayor-Castellanos  and
José María Villaseñor-Aguilar
Javier Ramón Sotomayor-Castellanos
Affiliation:
Universidad Michoacana de San Nicolás de Hidalgo. Ciudad Universitaria, Morelia, Michoacán. 58130 México. e-mail: [email protected]
José María Villaseñor-Aguilar
Affiliation:
Universidad Michoacana de San Nicolás de Hidalgo. Ciudad Universitaria, Morelia, Michoacán. 58130 México. e-mail: [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

Five historical full-size wood structural beams of Picea abies were tested with ultrasound. The speed of ultrasound, the modulus of elasticity, the moisture content and the wood density were measured for each specimen. The speed of the ultrasound waves in the radial, tangential and longitudinal directions was 1,769 m/s, 1,599 and 5,713 m/s respectively. The modulus of elasticity in the radial, tangential and longitudinal directions was 1,353 MPa, 1,069 MPa and 13,863 MPa respectively. The moisture content was on average 11.92% and the density was on average 422 kg/m3. Wood parameters such as density and orthotropic directions had influence in ultrasound measurements. In spite of local weakness in the beams, they had enough strength to be considered full structural members.

Keywords

biologicalcelluar (material type)acoustic
Type
Articles
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 1618: Symposium 8A – Cultural Heritage and Archaeological Issues in Materials Science , 2014 , pp. 257 - 262
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Vecco, M., Journal of Cultural Heritage 11, 321–324 (2010).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huang, C.-L., Lindström, H., Nakada, R., Ralston, J., Holz als Roh- und Werkstoff 61, 321–335 (2003).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hasegawa, M., Takata, M., Matsumura, J., Oda, K., Ultrasonics 51, 296–302 (2011).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosner, S., Konnerth, J., Plank, B., Salaberger, D. and Hansmann, C., Trees 24, 931–940 (2010).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tarmian, A., Eshaghi, S., Gholamiyan, H., Journal of the Indian Academy of Wood Science 7, 43–48 (2010).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moreno Chan, J., Walker, J.C., Raymond, C.A., Wood Science and Technology 45, 609–626 (2011).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Noguchi, T., Obataya, E., Ando, K., Journal of Cultural Heritage 13, S21–S25 (2012).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bucur, V., International Association of Wood Anatomists Bulletin 9, 67–74 (1988).Google Scholar
Pellerin, R.F. and Ross, R.J., Nondestructive Evaluation of Wood (Forest Products Society, 2002).Google Scholar
Bucur, V., Declercq, N.F., Ultrasonics 44, e829–e831 (2006).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Larsen, H.J., COST E24 Seminar on Reliability of Timber structures, Portugal (2001).Google Scholar
Unterwieser, H., Schickhofer, G., European Journal of Wood Products 69, 171–181 (2011).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kotlínová, M., Horáček, P., Kloiber, M., Wood Research 55, 11–20 (2010).Google Scholar
Ono, T., Norimoto, M., Japan Journal of Applied Physics 22, 611–614 (1983).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feeney, F.E., Chivers, R.C., Evertsen, J.A. and Keating, J., Ultrasonics 36, 449–453 (1998).CrossRefGoogle Scholar