United States Department of Agriculture

Nondestructive Evaluation of the

Tensile Properties of Structural
Lumber from the Spruce–Pine–Fir
Species Grouping
Relationship between Grain Angle and
Energy Loss
Nusret As
C. Adam Senalik
Robert J. Ross
Xiping Wang

Forest Forest Products Research Note September

Service Laboratory FPL–RN–0382 2020
Abstract Contents
This study was undertaken to examine the relationship Introduction...........................................................................1
between lumber grain angle and the energy loss Literature Review..................................................................1
characteristics of structural lumber. A random sample of
100 spruce–pine–fir lumber specimens was obtained from a Objective...............................................................................2
local lumber yard. Grain angle was measured at numerous Materials and Methods..........................................................2
locations for each specimen with equipment that uses a
dielectric nondestructive testing technique. A commonly Results and Discussion.......................................................10
used free transverse vibration test, in which the specimens Concluding Comments.......................................................11
were simply supported in a flatwise bending mode, was
Literature Cited...................................................................11
used to determine the energy loss characteristics of the
specimens. Increases in grain angle resulted in greater
energy loss. A statisically significant positive correlative
relationship was found between grain angle and energy loss.
More importantly, based on results from this study, energy
loss measurements may be useful for detecting lumber with
low strength values.
Keywords: transverse vibration, lumber, grain angle,
nondestructive evaluation

Acknowledgment
This research was supported by TÜBITAK, Ankara, Turkey.
Project number: 1059B191601491.

September 2020
As, Nusret; Senalik, C. Adam; Ross, Robert J.; Wang, Xiping. 2020.
Nondestructive evaluation of the tensile properties of structural lumber
from the spruce–pine–fir species grouping: relationship between grain
angle and energy loss. Research Note FPL-RN-0382. Madison, WI:
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Forest Products
Laboratory. 12 p.
A limited number of free copies of this publication are available to the
public from the Forest Products Laboratory, One Gifford Pinchot Drive,
Madison, WI 53726-2398. This publication is also available online at
www.fpl.fs.fed.us. Laboratory publications are sent to hundreds of libraries
in the United States and elsewhere.
The Forest Products Laboratory is maintained in cooperation with the
University of Wisconsin.
The use of trade or firm names in this publication is for reader information
and does not imply endorsement by the United States Department of
Agriculture (USDA) of any product or service.

In accordance with Federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its Agencies,
offices, and employees, and institutions participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national
origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived
from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by
USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident.
Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign
Language, etc.) should contact the responsible Agency or USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720–2600 (voice and TTY) or contact USDA through the
Federal Relay Service at (800) 877–8339. Additionally, program information may be made available in languages other than English.
To file a program discrimination complaint, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form, AD-3027, found online at http://www.ascr.usda.
gov/complaint_filing_cust.html and at any USDA office or write a letter addressed to USDA and provide in the letter all of the information requested in
the form. To request a copy of the complaint form, call (866) 632–9992. Submit your completed form or letter to USDA by: (1) mail: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, D.C. 20250–9410; (2) fax: (202) 690–7442; or
(3) email: program.intake@usda.gov.
USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer, and lender.
Nondestructive Evaluation of the Tensile
Properties of Structural Lumber from the
Spruce–Pine–Fir Species Grouping
Relationship between Grain Angle and Energy Loss
Nusret As, Professor
Istanbul University, Istanbul, Turkey
C. Adam Senalik, Research General Engineer
Robert J. Ross, Project Leader and Research Professor
Xiping Wang, Research Forest Products Technologist
USDA Forest Service, Forest Products Laboratory, Madison, Wisconsin, USA
Introduction
The tensile strength of wood products is important in the
design of engineered components and systems. For example,
the bottom chord of a wood truss is commonly stressed
in tension as are the undersides of large glued-laminated
timbers.
The tensile strength of wood is 20 to 50 times higher along
the grain (with fibers generally aligned with the long axis
of the wood) than in the radial or tangential directions in
softwood species used for structural dimension lumber. The
grain direction (also called grain orientation or slope of
grain) is the angle made by wood fibers and the edges of a
piece of wood. Variations in grain direction are especially
great around knots and are a major factor in the ultimate
strength of a piece of lumber in tension.
Energy storage and loss characteristics, as measured using
free vibration nondestructive techniques, have received
considerable examination as potential predictors of wood
strength. Logarithmic decrement obtained from free
vibration measurements is a measure of energy loss. It is
hypothesized that logarithmic decrement is sensitive to
wood product characteristics such as slope-of-grain and the
presence of large strength-reducing defects.
Literature Review
A search of the literature (USDA Forest Products
Laboratory’s library collection, Web of Science,
Engineering Index, Ross 2015, and Proceedings from
the International Nondestructive Testing and Evaluation
of Wood Symposium) yielded several technical papers
that investigated the use of common nondestructive test
parameters to predict the tensile strength of structural
lumber.
Hoyle (1968) summarized early research efforts from
a variety of laboratories that resulted in the technology
referred to as machine stress rating (MSR) of lumber. He
presented results from several studies specifically designed
to examine the relationship between the modulus of
elasticity (MOE) (measured in a flat-wise orientation, using
a center-span dead load) and the corresponding strength of
softwood structural lumber. He reported that the statistical
models relating static MOE and tensile strength yielded
correlation coefficients ranging from 0.74 to 0.82.
Orosz (1977) and Green and McDonald (1993a, 1993b)
used transverse vibration nondestructive testing techniques
to measure the dynamic MOE of structural lumber. Green
and McDonald reported correlation coefficients ranging
from 0.46 to 0.60 for the models relating dynamic MOE to
tensile strength.
Kaiserlik and Pellerin (1977) examined the use of a
longitudinal vibration nondestructive test method to
evaluate the tensile strength of softwood lumber. They
reported a correlation coefficient of 0.84 when dynamic
MOE was compared with tensile strength values. In addition
to measuring the longitudinal MOE, they measured the
attenuation rate of the wave as it travelled through the
lumber specimens. When incorporating this additional
parameter in their prediction equation, they reported a
correlation coefficient of 0.90.
Cramer and Fohrell (1990) reported on a series of studies
that developed fundamental information on the physical and
mechanical properties of wood in knots and fiber deviation
observed around knots. Knots significantly decrease the
tensile strength of structural lumber. Although this work
provided excellent information on stress distributions in the
vicinity of knots, it did not provide a commercially useful
methodology for evaluating lumber properties.

Pellerin and Ross (2015) provided a review of the concept
and development of tension proof loading, a technology that
focuses on testing each piece of lumber to a predetermined
load level near its design load. Pieces of lumber with a
strength below the set design load would fail, thereby
eliminating them from the lumber to be used.
Rajeshwar and others (1997) provided details of the use
of an ultrasonic technique for estimating the strength
of Southern Pine structural lumber. Ultrasound through
transmission measurements were made at several locations
in the vicinity of knots and were used to predict strength.
Researchers have investigated a nondestructive method for
measuring grain direction that is based on the difference
in dielectric constants (permittivity) of wood between
the directions of parallel (lower dielectric constant) and
perpendicular (higher dielectric constant) to the grain. The
dielectric constant is simply the ability of a material to
concentrate an applied electric field. Measuring a material’s
dielectric constant can be as simple as measuring the
current flow between two conductors with an alternating
voltage applied. At low moisture content levels, wood can
be considered a dielectric material (Kellogg 1981, James
and Hamill 1965, Lin 1967, Skaar 1948). The dielectric
constant of a nonconducting material determines the amount
of electric potential energy that is stored in a given volume
of the material within an electric field. It is expressed as
the ratio of the dielectric permittivity of the material to that
of a vacuum or dry air. Experimentally, it is determined as
the ratio of the capacity of a condenser with the material
acting as the dielectric to the capacity of the condenser
when the space between the plates is dry air. The dielectric
constant for wood varies with grain (fiber) direction, and
commercial equipment has been developed that uses this
fact to determine fiber orientation in wood products (Viguier
2015). It has been reported that knots, spiral grain, and other
defects can be detected by measuring dielectric properties
(Martin and others 1987).
The preceding review reveals the following: (1) there
has not been a systematic evaluation of the relationships
between widely used nondestructive test parameters and
the tensile properties of structural lumber, and (2) there
is no reported research focused on the potential of using
combinations of these nondestructive techniques to predict
either bending or tensile strength of structural lumber.
Objective
The USDA Forest Service, Forest Products Laboratory
(FPL) has initiated a program to develop technologies to
nondestructively evaluate the tensile properties of structural
lumber. The overarching objective of the program is to
systematically evaluate the relationships between several
nondestructive testing parameters and the tensile properties
of softwood structural lumber. The first phase of the overall
program is to examine relationships between nondestructive
2
Research Note FPL–RN–0382
Figure 1. Lumber specimens in conditioning room.
testing parameters and physical properties of wood. The
specific objective of the research described in this report
was to examine the relationship between grain angle and the
energy loss characteristics of structural lumber.
Materials and Methods
One hundred lumber specimens were used in this study
(Fig. 1). The lumber was obtained from a local lumber
yard and was visually graded as No. 2 from the spruce–
pine–fir lumber grouping. The lumber was nominally 2 by
4 in. in cross section (mean actual dimensions were 38 by
88 mm) and 12 ft (mean length 0.367 m) long. The lumber
specimens were conditioned to a moisture content level of
approximately 12%.
Grain Angle Measurement
A Metriguard Model 511 grain angle meter (Metriguard,
Pullman, Washington, USA) was used to measure grain
angle of the specimens (Fig. 2). Functional and operational
details of this equipment are described in Metriguard
Technologies, Inc. (2020). This meter is capable of
measuring a maximum grain angle of 23°. Measurements
were performed on both wide faces of each specimen, and
grain angle values were recorded on the wide face of each
specimen (Fig. 3).
A total of 200 grain angle measurements were recorded on
each of the two wide faces of each piece of lumber. The
maximum, minimum, number of grain angle values, and
measured values around knots that had grain angle values
<23° on both wide faces were recorded. The mean grain
angle values were calculated separately for three groups
of measurements: the middle (along the center of the wide
surface), the edge (close to the edge of the wide surface),
and around knots with grain angles <23°. The mean values
were calculated for both faces for a total of six means per
specimen (3 means × 2 surfaces). As previously stated,
the grain angle meter was capable of measuring up to 23°;
therefore, all grain angles greater than or equal to 23° would
 research
research described
described in in
this this report
report was was to toexamine
examine thethe relationship
relationship between
between grain grain angle
angle and and thethe energy
energy loss loss
research
characteristics described
characteristics ofof in this report
structural
structural lumber. was to examine the relationship between grain angle and the energy loss
lumber.
cribed in this report
characteristics was to of examine
structuralthe relationship between grain angle and the energy loss
lumber.
as of
cs to examine Materials
structural Materials
the relationship
lumber. and and
between Methods
Methods
Nondestructive Evaluation of the Tensile Properties of Structural Lumber from the Spruce–Pine–Fir Species Grouping
grain angle and the energy loss
t. was to examine Materials the relationship andbetween Methods grain angle and the energy loss
alsber. and One Methods
One hundred
hundred lumber
lumber specimens
specimens werewere usedused in in thisthisstudy
study (Fig.
(Fig. 1).1). The The lumber
lumber was was obtained
obtained from from a local
a local lumber
lumber
ods One
yard yard hundred
and and was was lumber
visually
visually specimens
graded
graded as were
as
No. No. 2 used
from
2 from inthethis
the study
spruce–pine–fir (Fig.
spruce–pine–fir 1). The
lumber
lumberlumbergrouping. was
grouping. obtained
TheThe lumber from
lumber wasa
waslocal
nominal lumber
nominal 2 by2 by
dhodslumber specimens
4yard
in.
4 in. and
in in were
was
cross
cross used in
visually
section
section (meanthis study
graded
(mean as
actual
actual (Fig.
No. 1). The
2 from
dimensions
dimensions lumber
thewerespruce–pine–fir
were 3838 was
byby 88obtained
88 mm) lumber
mm) andfrom
and 12 12aftlocal
grouping. ft
(mean(meanlumber
The
length lumber
length 0.367 was
0.367 m)m) nominal
long.long. The 2 by
The
ere used inlumber
s visually 4this
graded
in.
lumber study
in as
cross (Fig.
No.
specimens 2 from
section
specimens 1).wereThe
(mean
were lumber
theconditioned actual
conditioned was
spruce–pine–fir obtained
dimensions
to to alumber
a moisture from
moisturewere a38
grouping.
content local
by level
content 88lumber
Themm)
level lumber
of ofand 12was
approximately nominal
ft (mean
approximately 2 by 0.367 m) long. The
length
12%.12%.
were
o.section
2 fromused the
(mean inspruce–pine–fir
lumber this
actualstudy
specimens (Fig.were
dimensions 1). The
lumber were lumber
conditioned 38 by was
grouping. toThe
88 aobtained
mm) lumber
moistureand 12 from
was a local
nominal
ft (mean
content level lumber
2ofbyapproximately
length 0.367 m) long.12%. The
sdimensions
No. 2were
mens fromGrainGrain
were
conditionedAngle
38 Angle
the spruce–pine–fir
by 88 toMeasurement
Measurement
amm) lumber
and
moisture ftgrouping.
12content (mean level The
length lumber
0.367 m)
of approximately was long.nominalThe 2 by
12%.
ual
d todimensions
a moistureGrain were Angle
content byMeasurement
38 level 88ofmm) and 12 ft (mean
approximately 12%.length 0.367 m) long. The
gle AA Metriguard
Metriguard Model
Model 511 511 graingrain angleangle meter
meter (Metriguard,
(Metriguard, Pullman,
Pullman, Washington,
Washington, USA)USA) was was used used to tomeasure
measure grain
grain
onedMeasurement
to a moisture
A angle
Metriguard content Model level511 of approximately
grain angle meter 12%. (Metriguard, Pullman, Washington, USA)arewas used to in measure grain
angle ofof thethe specimens
specimens (Fig. (Fig. 2).2). Functional
Functional and and operational
operational details
details of of
thisthisequipment
equipment are
described
described in
Metriguard
Metriguard
dntModel 511 angle grain
Technologies,of the
Technologies, angle meter
specimens
Inc. Inc. (Metriguard,
(2020). (Fig.
(2020). This2).
This meter Pullman,
Functional
meter is is capable Washington,
and
capable operational
ofof measuring USA)
measuring a was
details ofused
maximum
a maximum tograin
this equipment measure
grain angle
angle grain
are ofdescribed
of
23°.23°. in Metriguard
Measurements
Measurements
gle meter (Metriguard,
specimens (Fig.
Technologies,
were were 2).
performed
performed Pullman,
FunctionalInc.onon both Washington,
and
(2020).
both operational
wide This
wide meter
faces
faces USA)
ofdetails
is
of
each was
capable
each used
ofspecimen,
this
specimen, to and
of equipmentmeasure
measuring and grain agrain
are
grain described
maximum
angle
angle values
values inwere
grain Metriguard
angle
were recordedof 23°.
recorded ononMeasurements
thethewidewide facefaceofof
angle
s, Inc. meter
nctional and
(2020).
were
each (Metriguard,
operational
each This
specimen meter(Fig.
performed
specimen Pullman,
details
ison 3).of
capable
(Fig.both 3).wideWashington,
this
of equipment
measuring
faces of each USA)aaremaximumwas used
described
specimen, in
graintoMetriguard
and measure
angle
grain angle ofgrain
23°.valuesMeasurementswere recorded on the wide face of
eter
med Functional
is
oncapable
both each and
wideof operational
measuring
faces of(Fig.
specimen each adetails
maximum
specimen,
3). of thisgrain equipment
and angle angle
grain ofare23°.described
Measurements
values were in Metriguard
recorded on the wide face of
meter
senof(Fig. is
each3). A Atotal
capable total of
ofof200 200 grain
measuring grain angle
aangle
maximummeasurements
specimen, and grain angle values were recorded on the wide measurementsgrain were
angle were recorded
of recorded
23°. on on
Measurements eacheach
face ofofofthethetwo two wide wide faces
faces ofof eacheach piece
piece ofof lumber.
lumber.
aces of each A The
The total
specimen,of 200and
maximum,
maximum, grain
minimum,
grainangle
minimum, angle measurements
number
number
valuesofwere ofgrain were
grain angle
recorded recorded
angle values,
values,
on theonand each
and
wide of the
measured
measured
face of twovalues wide
values faces knots
around
around ofknots
each thatpiece
thathad hadof
grainlumber.
grain angle
angle
0 grain angle The
values measurements
maximum,
values <23°<23° onon both were
minimum,
both wide recorded
wide number
facesfaces wereon ofeach
were grain
recorded. ofangle
recorded. theThe two
values,
The wide
mean mean andfaces
graingrain ofangle
measured
angle each valuespiecewere
values of lumber.
around
were knots that
calculated
calculated had grain
separately
separately angle
forforthree
three
ments
m, minimum,were groupsrecorded
values number
groups <23°
ofof onofeach
on bothof
grain
measurements:
measurements: widethethe
angle two
values,
faces
the wide
middlewere
middle andfaces
(along
(along ofthe
measured
recorded. each
theThe piece
values
center mean
center ofofofthelumber.
around
grain
thewide knots
angle
wide that had
values
surface),
surface), the grain
were
the edge angle
calculated
edge (close
(close to separately
to
thetheedgeedge offor thethree
of the
urements
of both
on grainwide were
angle
groups
wide wide recorded
values,
faces of were
surface),
surface), and on
and
Figure andeach
measured
recorded.
measurements: around
2.aroundofThe
Device the
thevalues
knots twowith
mean
middle
knots
for wide
around
grain
with (along
grain
measurement faces
grainknots
angle of
the
angles
angles
of each
that
values
center
<23°. piece
had
<23°.of grain
were the
The of
The lumber.
angle
calculated
wide
mean mean valuesseparately
surface),
values
Figure werethe
were edgefor three
(close
calculated
3. Lumber calculated tofor
for
specimens the
both edge
both faces
with ofgrain
faces the
forfor
a angle
a
ber of grain
re recorded.
easurements: wide
total angle
The
the
total ofof values,
mean
middle
surface),
sixsix grain
grain
means
means and
(along
and measured
angle
angle.
perper the
around values
center
specimen knots
specimen values
were
of
with
(3(3 the
means around
calculated
wide
grain
means knots
surface),
angles
× 2× surfaces). that
separately
<23°.
2 surfaces). the hadedge
The
AsAs grain
for three
(close
mean
previously angle
previously to
values the
stated, edge
were
measurements
stated, of the
calculated
thethe grain on
grain angle for
surface.
angle both
meter
meter faces
was was for
capable a
capable
),were
le (along
and recorded.
aroundthe
total
of of ofThe
center
knots
measuring sixof
measuring mean
with the
meansupgrain
up grain
wide
to per
to
23°; angle
surface),
angles
specimen
23°; therefore, values
<23°.
therefore, the
(3The were
edge
means
all all mean
grain calculated
(close
grain×angles to the
2values
surfaces).
angles separately
edge
were
greater
greater As than than for
ofpreviously
the
calculated oror three
equalforstated,
equal both
to to23° faces
23° the
would forbe
grain
would a be
angle
reported meter
reported asaswas
23°. 23°.capable
Finally,
Finally,
iddle
ith
means (along
grain
perangles
specimen
of
three be
the reported
center
<23°.
measuring
three (3
different
different of
The
means
up as
the
mean mean
to
mean23°.
wide
×
23°;2
grainFinally,
valuessurface),
surfaces).
therefore,
grain angle were
angle three
Asthe
all
values different
edge
calculated
previously
values grain
were were(close
anglesmean
for to
both
stated,
calculated grain
the
greater
calculated edge
faces
the anglefor
grain
than
depending of
depending orathe
angle
equal
onon n meter
to
knots. is
23°
knots.
knots total
waswould number
capablebe of
reported knots as (<23°+
23°. ≥23°),
Finally,
gsmeans
with
up tograin
× 2three
23°; values
angles
surfaces).
therefore,
different were
<23°.As The
all mean calculated
previously
grain mean
angles
grain depending
values
stated,
greater
angle were
thethan
values on
grain orknots.
calculated
were angle
equal for
meter
to 23°
calculated both was faces
would capable
depending beforreported
a xknots.
on as 23°. Finally,
is grain angle mean value (for middle part of surface
all
nt (3mean
means
grain Weighted
×Weighted
angles
grain 2Weighted
surfaces).
greater
angle grain
grain
values As
than angleangle mean
previously
orangle
were equal mean
calculatedtovaluevalue
stated,
23° with
wouldwith
the
depending all all
grain
be knotsknots
onangle
reported (WGA
knots.(WGA
meter
as with
23°. was
with ) capable
of
Finally,
knots
knots ) of
each each lumber
middlelumber specimen
specimen was was calculated
calculated using
using
Weighted grain grain
angle mean mean value value
with with
all all
knots knots
(WGA of lumber), and
with knots) of each lumber specimen was calculated using
re, allwere
alues the theformula
graincalculated
anglesformula in
greater in
Equation
depending Equation
than or (1).
onequal (1).
knots. to 23° would be reported as 23°. Finally,
(WGA ) of each lumber specimen was calculated
with knots) of each lumber specimen was calculated
ain angle mean
e values were the formula valuewith
calculated
with
inknots all
Equation
depending
knots (1). (WGA
on knots. xedge is grain using angle mean value (for edge part of lumber
with all knots
n Equation using the
(WGA
(1). formula in Equation (1):
with knots) of each lumber specimen was calculated using surface).
ue with all knots (WGAwith knots) of each lumber specimen was calculated using
 n<23 n<23    n≥n23≥23   (100 (100 nknots
− n−knots ) / )2/ 2Weighted   grain(100
(100 −angle nknots
n−knots ) / )2/ 2value
mean  includes

WGA WGA withwith knots
knots  n<23 < 23<23   n≥23 ≥ 23 ≥23   (100 − nknots ) / 2 xobtained
= x x + + x x + + x middle
middle  + +(100 − nknots ) / 2 x edge x edge
  (1)measurements
(1)
WGA with knots    100 100 100 100 100
x < 23 −+n  /x2≥ 23  +    100 − n x middle 100 100  + from
  lumber
100 100 surface x (edge
  and middle)
(1) and
  n≥23 100 ( ) ( ) / 2 that have <23° edge
 n<23   100
knots  100 (1) knotsknots 100 and ≥23° grain angles. Additionally,
WGA with x < 23 +
  n≥23knots  100 (100− nknots
x ≥ 23  + 
100) / 2    +  (100 100 − nknotsx )middle / 2  +  100
 
x edge (1) 
 +   n x ≥ 23  +   (100 − nknots ) x/ middle   x edge (1) weighted grain  angle mean value without ≥23° knots
100 ≥23 x≥ 23  + 100 2   (100 100 − nknots ) / 2 
x< 23  +  WeightedWeighted  grain grain angleangle mean mean xvalue  with
value
middle  +with
 <23° <23° knots
knots (WGA (WGA withwith
x edge <23<23knots ) of
knots
includes
(1)
) ofeacheach measurements
lumber
lumber specimen
specimen obtained
was was from lumber surface (edge
calculated
calculated
  100 Weighted
usingusing 
thethe 
grain
formula
formula
100
angleinangle
in mean
Equation
Equation value(2).   100 
with <23° knots (WGAwith <23 knots) of each lumber specimen was calculatedand middle) and knots that have only <23° grain angles. And
Weighted grain mean(2). value with <23° knots finally, grain angle mean value excluding knots includes
ain angle mean using value the formulawith <23° knots (WGA
in Equation (2). with <23 knots) of each lumber specimen was calculated
with (WGA ) of each lumber specimen was calculated measurements obtained from lumber surface (edge and
mula<23° knots (WGA
in Equation (2). with <23 knots) of each lumber specimen was calculated
with <23 knots
using the formula
ue with <23° knots (WGAwith <23 knots) of each lumber specimen in Equation (2): was calculated middle) without knots. Table 1 provides a summary of data
 n<23n<23    (100 (100 − n−<23 n<23 ) / )2/ x2 x obtained
   (100 (from
100 − n−<23n<23 )lumber
/ )2/ 2  
2). WGA WGA = = x x + + + + the x x samples used. Measured
(2)(2) values
100x < 23  +  (100 −100 <23 ) / 2
with with<23<23 knots  n
knots < 23<23    n100 middle    (100 − n<23 ) / 2 edgeedge
middle  
WGA with <23 =n 100<23 x/middle   in 100
are +given 100 2, and
Table x edge   angle mean
grain (2)values found are
WGA
n
 <23   ( 100
knots − ) / 2
100 x middle
<23
  
  +  100 (2) (100 − n <23 ) 2
  1003. Grain 
 (100 = x +
) / 2 x   +  (100
 xgiven in Table (2) angle mean values with or without
100− n<23 ) / 2 x edge
 n<23 with  <23 knots − n < 23
 edge 
x + <23100   100 (2) 

   (100 − n<23 ) / 2  
  (100  knots were used to investigate the relationship between
100− n<23 ) / 2 x edge
 n < 23 middle

 100 <23 Grain x<Grain
23 
100   knots
x middle  (2)
ts =   +angle
angle meanmean value
value except
except + knots (GAMV(GAMV ) was
) was calculated
calculated using
grain usinganglethe theformula
andformula in
attenuationin
Equation
Equation (3).
obtained (3). with transverse
 100 Grain  angle 100 value except knots  (GAMV 100 except except
knots
knots
mean except knots) was calculated using the formula in Equation (3).
vibration.
mean value except knots (GAMVexcept knots) was calculated using the formula in Equation (3).
Grain angle mean value except knots (GAMVexcept knots) was
ots (GAMVexcept knots) was calculated using the formula in Equation (3). Logarithmic Decrement
calculated using the formula in Equation (3): (( x middle
x middle))
+ x+edgex edge 
knots (GAMVexcept knots) was calculated using theGAMV formula
GAMV except
in
exceptknots(
Equation
knots
  (3).
= = x middle + x edge) (Decay   of Free Vibration)
(  xGAMV middle + except ) 
x edge knots   =  
 (3) 2
22  
The following
  briefly describes the test setup that was used
(
 xGAMV middle +except )
x edgeknots  =
   2

  for 
measurement of logarithmic decrement (a measurement
GAMVexcept knots =   x middle + x edge
GAMVexcept knots = 
( 2 )   of energy loss) (Ross 2015).
where where
where 
 2  Figure 4 illustrates the free transverse vibration test setup
where  
WGA WGA WGA with
withwith
knots is is
knots
knots is
weighted weighted
weighted graingraingrain
angle
angle angle
(WGA)(WGA) (WGA) mean meanmean
value value
value withwith allall knots, used. The specimen was simply supported at both ends. A
knots,
WGA with all
with knots is
knots, weighted grain angle (WGA) mean value with all knots, span length of 11.5 ft (3.5 m) was used.
is weighted n<23 ngrain
is is
<23 number
number
angle of (WGA)ofknots
knots (<23°),
mean (<23°), value with all knots,
n<23 nis<23 is number
number of knots of knots (<23°), (<23°), A slight deflection was introduced at the midspan by
le (WGA)xmean x is value
is
grain
grain with
angle
angle all
mean knots,
mean value value of of
knotsknots for for<23°,
<23°, mechanically tapping the specimen. The specimen was
er of knots (<23°), <23 <23
angle (WGA) x<23 xmean
is<23 isvalue
grain grain
angle angle
with mean allmean knots,
value value
of knots of knots for <23°, for <23°,
then allowed to freely oscillate in the vertical (transverse)
angle mean n≥23 nvalue
is is
≥23 number
number
of knots ofof knots
for knots
<23°, (≥23°),
(≥23°),
n
n≥23 is≥23 is number
number of knots (≥23°), of knots (≥23°), direction, and the load at one support was continuously
nots for <23°, monitored and recorded (Fig. 5).
er of knots (≥23°), x≥23 is grain angle mean value of knots for ≥23°
of knots for <23°,
(accepted 23),

3
 Research Note FPL–RN–0382

Table 1—Basic statistical information—average values, standard deviation values, maximum and
minimum values, coefficient of variation
WGA mean Grain angle Oscillation
WGAa mean value with mean value frequency of
Mean number value with all <23° knots without knots Logarithmic transverse
Values of knots knots (deg) (deg) (deg) decrement vibration (Hz)
Mean 28.88 7.23 3.43 2.77 0.028 6.47
Standard deviation 13.57 2.18 1.03 0.90 0.007 0.66
Minimum value 0 1.95 1.71 1.27 0.017 4.95
Maximum value 67 13.12 7.39 6.97 0.086 7.71
Coefficient of 48.38 30.26 30.00 32.58 27.434 10.22
variation (%)
a
WGA, weighted grain angle.

4
Nondestructive Evaluation of the Tensile Properties of Structural Lumber from the Spruce–Pine–Fir Species Grouping

Figure 4. Free transverse vibration test setup.

Figure 5. Recorded signal from freely oscillating specimen.

5
6
Table 2—Measured grain angle values
Numbered face of lumber Other side face of lumber
Grain angle around knots Grain angle of lumber (deg) Grain angle around knots Grain angle of lumber (deg)
≤22° ≥23° Middle of lumber Side of lumber ≤22° ≥23° Middle of lumber Side of lumber
Specimen Number Min. Max. Mean Number Mean Number Min. Max. Mean Number Mean
No. of knots (deg) (deg) (deg) of knots (deg) Min. Max. Mean Min. Max. Mean of knots (deg) (deg) (deg) of knots (deg) Min. Max. Mean Min. Max. Mean
1 9 8 13 11.44 23 23 2.2 10.1 4.72 0.1 5.5 0.952 18 5 15 11.271 12 23 1.8 7.1 4.415 0.1 4 1.683
2 0 0 0 0 17 23 1.8 5.4 3.02 0.1 4.4 0.765 1 13 13 13 18 23 1.8 7.1 3.48 0.1 1.8 0.31
3 2 10 14 12 23 23 1.6 5 2.975 0.1 2.1 0.384 4 12 15 12.75 28 23 1.5 5.1 3.373 0.1 2.8 0.865
4 8 7 15 11.75 21 23 4.3 9.1 5.583 0.1 5.5 2.815 17 6 15 8.47 28 23 1.8 5.1 3.025 0.1 3.3 0.771
5 20 6 15 10.19 19 23 1.8 4.1 3.044 0.1 2.6 0.879 15 8 15 10 21 23 2.1 5 3.478 0.1 4 0.596
6 5 6 8 7.6 18 23 2.1 5.2 3.308 0.1 3.7 0.588 2 9 15 12 24 23 2.1 5.1 3.575 0.1 3.1 0.852
7 19 7 15 11.23 33 23 4.4 10.2 7.55 0.2 8 3.489 22 7 15 10.86 45 23 4.1 9.2 6.167 0.1 2 0.679
8 4 8 13 10.5 22 23 4.1 22 6.509 0.1 22 2.661 1 12 12 12 24 23 2.5 22 6.68 0.1 22 4.2
9 12 6 15 9.41 11 23 1.5 7 4.5 0.1 3 0.362 13 5 15 8.15 25 23 1.6 22 4.92 0.1 1.9 1.694
10 22 6 15 10.63 23 23 1.4 12.4 4.389 0.1 4.8 1.295 21 5 14 10.07 31 23 1.8 7 3.617 0.1 3 1.1
11 3 10 15 13.33 10 23 2 10.1 5.555 0.1 4 2.016 2 10 15 12.5 14 23 2 5.2 3.28 0.1 1.7 0.353
12 30 5 15 9.73 22 23 1.8 5.1 2.59 0.1 2.5 0.659 19 5 14 7.5 19 23 1.5 5.1 3.027 0.1 2.5 0.882
13 3 14 15 14.66 14 23 2.2 19 8.136 0.1 4.1 1.671 0 0 0 0 17 23 2.8 9.2 6.28 0.1 5.5 1.962
14 24 5 15 9.49 24 23 3.1 8.1 4.763 0.1 3.4 1.953 9 5 14 10.32 36 23 1.8 5.2 3.338 0.4 3.5 1.726
15 8 6 10 8.125 25 23 2.2 7.2 3.52 0.1 2.5 0.369 9 8 15 12 19 23 1.8 7.2 3.131 0.1 2.5 0.628
16 9 6 13 10.45 25 23 2.7 22 7.354 1.2 5.5 3.411 22 6 15 9.36 41 23 2.8 22 6.525 0.1 22 3.447
17 11 5 11 6.63 21 23 1.4 3.3 2.255 0.1 1.7 0.318 9 5 14 7.44 16 23 2.3 5.8 4.027 0.1 10 2.263
18 17 5 10 8.05 15 23 2.5 4.2 3.5 0.1 2.7 0.944 19 5 15 11.89 34 23 1.6 6.8 3.667 0.1 4.5 0.738
19 2 7 8 7.5 4 23 2.1 5.1 3.383 0.1 3.2 1.626 2 5 7 6 4 23 1.2 3.3 2.1 0.1 0.8 0.159
20 10 8 15 11.59 25 23 7.1 22 11.5 0.6 22 4.688 8 9 14 12.12 18 23 2.8 22 8.113 0.1 22 3.588
21 1 12 12 12 14 23 2.3 5.1 3.55 0.1 2.5 1.075 1 12 12 12 9 23 1.7 5.1 3.142 0.1 2.8 0.867
22 0 0 0 0 13 23 2.2 22 5.291 0.1 22 2.225 0 0 0 0 13 23 3.2 22 7.014 0.1 22 4.026
23 8 5 11 8.75 18 23 1.6 3.2 2.544 0.1 2.5 0.486 5 5 12 7.6 15 23 1.5 2.9 2.4 0.1 1.2 0.336
24 9 8 15 10.33 20 23 3.3 13.1 6.992 0.2 7.1 2.627 14 6 15 11.42 29 23 3.1 6.1 4.563 0.1 2.8 0.6
25 2 10 10 10 7 23 1.2 5.4 3.11 0.1 2.5 0.721 2 6 8 7 6 23 2.4 8.4 3.725 0.1 3.2 0.906
26 4 15 15 15 13 23 1.1 7.1 2.436 0.1 7.1 0.984 5 13 15 14.6 4 23 1.1 5.1 2.87 0.1 3.1 0.894
27 11 6 15 9.92 32 23 1.8 8.1 4.529 0.1 4.5 1.64 31 7 15 9.93 31 23 1.2 6.1 3.786 0.1 2.8 1.021
28 4 5 8 6 0 0 2.2 5.5 3.425 0.1 6 1.464 4 6 15 10.25 1 23 1.4 3.9 2.523 0.1 1 0.257
29 1 14 14 14 7 23 2.2 6.6 4 0.1 2.8 1.163 0 0 0 0 12 23 2.2 9.8 4.555 0.1 4 0.993
30 0 0 0 0 13 23 1.1 22 5.571 0.1 10.2 1.205 2 9 10 9.5 11 23 2.7 15.2 6.575 0.1 14.1 2.688
31 10 6 12 8.7 8 23 4.1 6.2 5.117 0.8 4.3 2.424 18 6 14 8.66 22 23 1.3 4.4 2.945 0.1 1.6 0.315
32 5 5 11 7.2 21 23 3.1 10.1 5.715 0.1 4.8 1.922 5 8 11 9 24 23 1.5 9.1 5.363 0.1 6.5 1.941
33 19 5 13 7.99 20 23 1.5 5.1 2.973 0.1 1.3 0.545 24 7 14 9.68 16 23 4.6 8.4 6.545 1.9 6.4 3.2
34 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.1 4.4 2.877 0.1 2.8 0.427 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.6 5.1 3.169 0.1 4.1 1.362
35 7 9 15 12.57 22 23 2.5 5.1 3.48 0.1 1.7 0.647 0 0 0 0 24 23 2.2 17 7.656 0.1 22 4.268
36 4 5.8 15 11.7 17 23 2 4.2 3.109 0.1 1.5 0.524 4 8.8 12 10.2 15 23 4 8.1 6.208 0.1 3.5 2.088
37 3 15 15 15 24 23 2 7.1 4.24 0.1 5.3 1.337 4 12 15 13.5 22 23 3.3 8 5.9 0.1 5.3 1.756
38 0 0 0 0 15 23 2.2 6.5 4.18 0.2 5.6 2.061 0 0 0 0 17 23 2.1 5.1 3.127 0.1 2 0.62
39 9 7 12 9.33 24 23 3.2 8.1 5.208 0.1 5 2.389 14 6 16 9.28 18 23 1.5 6 3.12 0.1 2 0.506
40 3 10 12 10.66 20 23 1.5 6.2 4.073 0.1 3.5 1.179 11 6 15 8.545 22 23 1.3 3.2 2.386 0.1 1 0.229
41 32 5 10 7.021 15 23 2.6 4.8 3.775 0.1 5.5 1.88 35 5 15 8.448 23 23 1.1 3.8 2.925 0.1 2.6 0.627
42 12 8 15 12.71 27 23 2.7 5.3 4.033 0.1 5.1 1.459 7 6 15 10.271 28 23 2 6.7 4.97 0.1 4.4 1.321
43 12 6 12 8.5 32 23 3.1 8.1 4.458 0.1 9 1.535 12 6 15 10.157 15 23 2.2 10.1 6.27 0.1 5 1.745
44 9 6 15 9.42 34 23 1.7 8.2 4.11 0.1 5.1 1.31 18 7.7 11.8 9.12 22 23 4 6.1 4.522 0.4 3.8 2.24
45 1 9.1 9.1 9.1 5 23 1 6 2.855 0.1 4.5 1 2 6.2 8.2 7.2 6 23 2.8 5.4 4.218 0.5 4.4 2.3
46 7 10 13 10.71 19 23 3.1 7.2 5.378 0.1 3.7 1.68 0 0 0 0 22 23 1.5 5.7 3.2 0.1 2.7 0.795
47 25 5 14 7.68 14 23 1.5 4.4 2.356 0.1 1.5 0.294 13 7 12 9.53 8 23 3 5.2 4.089 0.3 2.7 1.528
48 1 5.8 5.8 5.8 7 23 2 7.1 4.038 0.1 4 1.507 5 6 8.5 7.16 10 23 1.1 4.4 2.4 0.1 2.8 0.522
49 2 8.5 12 10.25 17 23 1.6 5.2 3.286 0.1 1.4 0.45 2 11 12 11.5 13 23 1.3 4.4 3.189 0.1 9.8 1.269
Research Note FPL–RN–0382
 Table 2—Measured grain angle values—con.
Numbered face of lumber Other side face of lumber
Grain angle around knots Grain angle of lumber (deg) Grain angle around knots Grain angle of lumber (deg)
≤22° ≥23° Middle of lumber Side of lumber ≤22° ≥23° Middle of lumber Side of lumber
Specimen Number Min. Max. Mean Number Mean Number Min. Max. Mean Number Mean
No. of knots (deg) (deg) (deg) of knots (deg) Min. Max. Mean Min. Max. Mean of knots (deg) (deg) (deg) of knots (deg) Min. Max. Mean Min. Max. Mean
50 23 7 15 10.13 44 23 3.9 7.1 5.038 1.1 4.4 2.957 27 6 15 8.637 21 23 1.6 8.1 4.167 0.1 5.4 1.435
51 25 5 12 7.408 27 23 2.2 6.2 4.055 0.1 4.7 1.224 36 5 12 7.394 20 23 2.8 9.8 5.1 0.1 5.7 2.05
52 3 6.5 14 10.2 18 23 2.8 8.3 5.255 0.1 3.6 1.214 16 4.5 14 7.831 24 23 2.3 6.2 4.167 0.1 1.6 0.453
53 11 6 12 9.69 22 23 1.6 8.1 3.845 0.1 2.2 0.667 9 6 14 9.744 17 23 4.2 7.7 5.775 0.2 4.7 2.3
54 11 7 14 9.454 11 23 4 6.7 5.21 0.1 5.2 1.56 17 5 15 10.629 18 23 1.9 7.1 4.013 0.1 3 0.63
55 3 8 11 10.5 12 23 1.7 6.7 3.19 0.1 1.1 0.305 6 10 15 12.75 13 23 1.4 4.2 2.791 0.1 2.6 0.532
56 4 6 7 6.3 18 23 0.8 6.6 2.736 0.1 3.2 0.614 4 10 13 11.2 14 23 3 12 6.355 0.1 5.8 2.209
57 8 8.8 15 11.6 28 23 5.1 8.1 6.41 0.3 4 2.5 16 5.5 12.8 9.437 33 23 2.3 7.2 4.856 0.1 3 1.075
58 0 0 0 0 26 23 2.5 8.2 5.37 0.1 3.1 1.195 0 0 0 0 34 23 1.8 7.1 4.189 0.1 2.5 0.694
59 14 8.9 15 13.992 29 23 5 8.2 6.409 0.4 4.2 2.573 25 6 13 8.212 43 23 2.5 5.6 3.64 0.1 2.2 0.45
60 0 0 0 0 19 23 1.6 5.2 3.64 0.1 11 1.485 1 13 13 13 21 23 1.2 6.1 3.38 0.1 2.2 0.43
61 7 5 14 9.257 34 23 1.8 9.9 4.85 0.1 5 2.071 11 5 14 9.145 33 23 1 10 7.283 0.1 5 2.628
62 0 0 0 0 15 23 2.3 6.2 3.963 0.1 4 0.547 2 8.8 12.6 10.7 23 23 2 6.5 3.173 0.1 1.8 0.626
63 2 9 12 10.5 14 23 2.1 14 5.283 0.1 4 0.96 1 14 14 14 15 23 1.2 8 4.831 0.1 5.1 1.748
64 2 14 18 16 17 23 1 7.5 3.673 0.1 4 0.819 2 7.8 12 9.9 23 23 1.8 7.2 4.15 0.1 2 0.409
65 5 6 15 10.2 14 23 1.8 7 3.614 0.1 2 0.744 25 5 13 7.148 23 23 0.7 5 2.225 0.1 0.8 0.259
66 29 5 15 7.81 22 23 0.8 5 2.809 0.1 2 0.545 18 6 14 7.655 10 23 2.7 5.5 4.245 0.1 3.3 1.8
67 10 4 12 8.62 15 23 3.6 7.2 5.275 0.1 3.2 1.296 21 5 12 7.747 22 23 1.8 6 3.673 0.1 4.9 0.667
68 0 0 0 0 10 23 1.1 5.3 2.767 0.1 1.5 0.313 3 5.8 12 9.5 15 23 2.6 7.8 4.314 0.1 3.5 1.3
69 23 7 16 10.7 19 23 2.5 10.1 4.608 0.1 4.2 1.213 9 7.1 14 10.544 51 23 2.5 6.7 4.18 0.1 3.2 1.385
70 26 6 13 9.696 7 23 2.7 17 6.2 0.2 5.5 2.572 13 5.5 12 8.669 25 23 0.9 7.1 3.771 0.1 3.1 0.854
71 6 7 11 9.083 27 23 2.5 7.8 4.708 0.1 2.7 1.108 11 7 14 9.563 12 23 2.3 9 4.255 0.1 4.1 0.964
72 5 5 11 9.22 14 23 1.2 8.5 3.223 0.1 2.5 0.481 5 6 12 8.88 18 23 0.8 4 2.283 0.1 1.8 0.479
73 12 9 14 11.5 24 23 2 10.5 4.5 0.1 6.3 1.391 10 8 15 10.99 17 23 2.5 10.7 5.209 0.2 4 1.709
74 5 5 10 8.1 10 23 1.2 3.7 2.117 0.1 2 0.408 9 6 9.3 7.433 16 23 1.1 4 2.254 0.1 0.8 0.308
75 4 10 14 11.625 13 23 2.2 5.4 3.2 0.1 1.8 0.546 3 7.3 10 9.1 12 23 2.5 6.3 4.2 0.1 3 1.2
76 10 6 15 8.7 20 23 0.8 3.4 1.986 0.1 4 1.168 9 7 17 8.6 13 23 0.6 6 2.34 0.1 4.8 1.461
77 2 15 19 17 17 23 2.5 6 4.35 0.2 6 1.664 1 6.3 6.3 6.3 18 23 0.7 4 2.28 0.1 2.4 0.588
78 33 5 15 7.354 36 23 1.5 6.5 3.582 0.1 8.2 2.242 30 5.5 14 8.636 35 23 0.7 5.5 3.6 0.1 5.2 1.657
79 2 7 9.8 8.4 25 23 0.6 3.5 2.007 0.1 2.1 0.573 17 6 14 8.782 25 23 0.9 4 2.442 0.2 3.2 0.7
80 21 7 18 10.2 23 23 0.2 8 2.393 0.1 2.8 0.949 29 6 18 8.78 7 23 0.5 4.7 2.157 0.1 3.2 0.952
81 6 4 11 7.516 9 23 0.2 9.9 3.053 0.2 5.1 1.569 6 6.4 15 10.433 19 23 0.6 3.7 2.094 0.2 3.5 1.409
82 18 6 16 9.27 16 23 2 6.4 3.882 0.8 5.4 3.052 29 6 21 9.068 26 23 0.7 3.3 1.77 0.1 4.3 1.192
83 16 4.5 17 8.85 3 23 2.2 5.2 3.308 0.1 7.4 1.9 13 5.8 12 9.838 13 23 0.3 2.8 1.614 0.1 3.1 1.253
84 12 8 10 7.783 26 23 2 11 4.707 0.1 3.5 1.288 7 6.5 14.6 9.271 14 23 2.5 8 4.306 0.1 8.6 3.029
85 1 9 9 9 22 23 1.9 7.1 3.885 0.6 4.2 2.081 1 8.9 8.9 8.9 23 23 1.5 5.5 3.592 0.2 4 1.52
86 16 10 15 11.03 24 23 1 5.5 3.282 0.2 3.8 1.729 17 5.3 14.2 8.341 3 23 0.8 3.6 2.353 0.1 4.2 1.3
87 19 10 15 10.863 29 23 2.3 11.1 5.396 0.5 8.2 3.105 26 5 13 9.946 20 23 1.3 8.9 4.324 0.2 3.9 1.535
88 28 10 15 10.403 29 23 1.4 8.6 3.281 0.2 5 1.639 17 4 13.5 7.182 13 23 1.4 5.5 3.529 0.6 5.7 2.214
Nondestructive Evaluation of the Tensile Properties of Structural Lumber from the Spruce–Pine–Fir Species Grouping

89 1 13 13 13 10 23 1 6.3 2.978 0.1 3 0.865 3 5.5 9.8 8.1 6 23 2.2 5.5 4.094 0.2 7.7 2.407
90 2 9.1 13 11.05 18 23 2 3.4 2.782 0.3 10.1 2.364 14 6.7 10 7.428 6 23 1.7 6.7 3.182 0.2 4.4 1.142
91 1 5.3 5.3 5.3 14 23 1.2 9 3.638 0.2 11.2 1.968 0 0 0 0 22 23 1.1 12.3 4.642 0.3 7 1.837
92 6 4 7.5 6.85 7 23 2.2 6.6 4.039 0.4 3.8 1.869 10 5 6.2 5.82 11 23 1.4 6.8 3.72 0.2 8.1 1.645
93 8 6 10.8 8.1 15 23 2.5 18 5.362 0.2 5 1.871 12 6.4 12.2 11.725 14 23 1 8.2 4.422 0.3 7 3.207
94 10 7.4 20 11.514 1 23 1.4 6.7 3.94 0.2 3 1.457 8 8.2 15 12.587 12 23 1.8 6.3 3.665 0.1 4.3 1.621
95 8 7 11 8.775 11 23 1.5 10.5 4.3 0.2 3.3 1.258 15 4.3 13.2 9.573 12 23 1.9 5.3 2.967 0.1 1.2 0.481
96 33 6.1 15 10.99 22 23 1 8 2.328 0.1 2.8 1.138 24 7.1 12 9.483 17 23 2.4 6.8 4.583 0.2 3.7 1.736
97 5 7 11 8.52 32 23 1.8 11.8 4.174 0.5 3.5 1.647 5 5.8 15 10.48 24 23 1.1 9.5 4.02 0.1 6.2 2.083
98 13 5.5 15.2 7.984 19 23 2 16 6.548 0.6 6 3.513 9 5.5 12 9.033 22 23 1.5 12.3 4.646 0.5 4 2.054

7
99 9 5 7.3 4.744 32 23 1.5 7.4 4.84 0.2 4.5 2.06 12 5.3 13 8.833 22 23 2 15 4.96 0.2 4.1 1.866
100 2 12.4 13 12.95 15 23 0.4 13.2 3.869 0.1 7.7 1.9 1 5.6 5.6 5.6 12 23 0.3 7.2 2.756 0.1 5.4 2.449
 Research Note FPL–RN–0382

Table 3—Grain angle mean values (with and without knots) and logarithmic decrement
values
Oscillation
WGAa mean Grain angle frequency of
Mean value with all WGA mean value mean value transverse
Specimen number of knots with <23° knots without knots Logarithmic vibration
No. knots (deg) (deg) (deg) decrement (Hz)
1 31 7.59 4.07 2.94 0.0265 6.34
2 18 5.64 1.95 1.89 0.024 7.021
3 28.5 7.59 2.22 1.90 0.0273 6.18
4 37 8.84 3.91 3.05 0.0271 6.99
5 37.5 7.62 3.42 2.00 0.0264 6.7
6 24.5 6.71 2.32 2.08 0.0248 6.616
7 59.5 13.1 5.83 4.47 0.0326 5.941
8 25.5 9.30 5.16 5.01 0.0363 5.019
9 30.5 7.20 3.60 2.87 0.0209 7.557
10 48.5 9.78 4.27 2.60 0.0263 6.843
11 14.5 5.50 3.05 2.80 0.0274 6.169
12 45 7.88 3.53 1.79 0.0245 6.717
13 17 7.53 4.66 4.51 0.0387 4.955
14 46.5 10.1 4.03 2.95 0.0346 6.371
15 30.5 7.25 2.62 1.91 0.0258 6.311
16 48.5 11.8 5.89 5.18 0.0322 6.078
17 28.5 6.57 2.70 2.22 0.0217 7.062
18 42.5 8.72 3.63 2.21 0.0245 7.07
19 6 2.76 1.92 1.82 0.023 7.7
20 30.5 10.8 7.40 6.97 0.086 5.192
21 12.5 4.65 2.26 2.16 0.0242 6.536
22 13 7.03 4.64 4.64 0.0309 5.748
23 23 5.44 1.89 1.44 0.0202 6.884
24 36 9.34 4.56 3.70 0.0291 6.509
25 8.5 3.60 2.24 2.12 0.0237 7.286
26 13 4.19 2.38 1.80 0.02 7.399
27 52.5 10.7 4.29 2.74 0.0279 6.554
28 4.5 2.27 2.17 1.92 0.0189 7.373
29 10 4.66 2.74 2.68 0.0218 7.258
30 13 6.34 4.06 4.01 0.0305 5.938
31 29 6.70 3.58 2.70 0.0232 7.297
32 27.5 8.29 3.95 3.74 0.0312 6.366
33 39.5 8.06 4.49 3.32 0.0356 6.5
34 0 1.96 1.96 1.96 0.0175 7.671
35 26.5 8.73 4.38 4.01 0.0331 5.212
36 20 6.52 3.30 2.98 0.0345 5.482
37 26.5 8.22 3.69 3.31 0.0334 5.567
38 16 5.78 2.50 2.50 0.0364 5.52
39 32.5 7.79 3.58 2.81 0.0297 6.652
40 28 6.91 2.49 1.97 0.0224 6.433
41 52.5 8.09 4.14 2.30 0.0244 6.97
42 37 9.31 3.79 2.95 0.0325 5.549
43 35.5 8.83 4.20 3.50 0.0324 5.908
44 41.5 9.47 3.86 3.05 0.0353 6.407
45 7 3.79 2.67 2.59 0.0202 7.077
46 24 7.18 3.02 2.76 0.0296 5.83
47 30 5.62 3.30 2.07 0.0209 7.404
48 11.5 4.06 2.27 2.12 0.0248 6.669
49 17 5.37 2.23 2.05 0.0299 5.866
50 57.5 11.2 4.89 3.40 0.0325 6.382
51 54 9.08 4.39 3.12 0.0339 6.324
52 30.5 7.58 3.32 2.77 0.0412 6.233
53 29.5 7.71 3.81 3.15 0.0299 6.657
54 28.5 6.83 3.89 2.85 0.0293 6.666
55 17 4.83 2.17 1.71 0.0281 5.905
56 20 6.44 3.21 3.00 0.0297 6.729
57 42.5 10.4 4.51 3.71 0.0331 6.464
58 30 8.92 2.86 2.86 0.037 5.176

8
Nondestructive Evaluation of the Tensile Properties of Structural Lumber from the Spruce–Pine–Fir Species Grouping

Table 3—Grain angle mean values (with and without knots) and logarithmic decrement
values—con.
Oscillation
WGAa mean Grain angle frequency of
Mean value with all WGA mean value mean value transverse
Specimen number of knots with <23° knots without knots Logarithmic vibration
No. knots (deg) (deg) (deg) decrement (Hz)
59 55.5 11.9 4.70 3.27 0.0313 6.157
60 20.5 6.45 2.29 2.23 0.0319 5.961
61 42.5 10.9 4.64 4.21 0.0407 5.434
62 20 6.15 2.17 2.08 0.0288 6.203
63 16 6.20 3.33 3.21 0.0347 5.252
64 22 6.62 2.48 2.27 0.0317 5.671
65 33.5 6.61 2.65 1.71 0.0288 7.516
66 39.5 7.00 3.66 2.35 0.0224 7.409
67 34 7.35 3.58 2.73 0.0239 7.237
68 14 4.86 2.27 2.17 0.0217 6.898
69 51 11.2 4.09 2.85 0.0271 6.779
70 35.5 7.69 4.45 3.35 0.0373 6.175
71 28 7.26 3.33 2.76 0.0267 6.128
72 21 5.41 1.99 1.62 0.0212 6.903
73 31.5 8.16 4.09 3.20 0.0371 5.665
74 20 4.54 1.72 1.27 0.0196 7.713
75 16 5.17 2.58 2.29 0.026 7.059
76 26 5.91 2.49 1.74 0.0272 6.971
77 19 6.03 2.39 2.22 0.0274 6.34
78 67 11.6 4.40 2.77 0.0368 5.863
79 34.5 7.51 2.12 1.43 0.0258 6.874
80 40 6.76 3.56 1.61 0.028 6.156
81 20 5.40 2.45 2.03 0.0233 6.881
82 44.5 8.46 4.20 2.47 0.0264 6.966
83 22.5 4.77 3.07 2.02 0.0209 7.598
84 29.5 7.77 3.82 3.33 0.0248 6.896
85 23.5 7.38 2.83 2.77 0.0296 5.93
86 30 6.18 3.40 2.17 0.0245 7.218
87 47 9.86 5.13 3.59 0.0363 6.059
88 43.5 8.43 4.14 2.67 0.0251 6.018
89 10 4.36 2.71 2.59 0.0224 6.904
90 20 5.29 2.82 2.37 0.0282 6.176
91 18.5 6.62 3.03 3.02 0.0232 6.953
92 17 4.91 3.09 2.82 0.0248 7.184
93 24.5 7.17 4.37 3.72 0.0373 5.689
94 15.5 4.83 3.51 2.67 0.0229 6.678
95 23 5.49 3.08 2.26 0.0267 6.599
96 48 8.76 4.73 2.45 0.0266 7.166
97 33 8.92 3.31 2.98 0.0278 6.127
98 31.5 8.51 4.64 4.19 0.0275 6.518
99 37.5 9.10 3.82 3.43 0.0338 5.76
100 15 5.59 2.86 2.74 0.0247 6.928
a
WGA, weighted grain angle.

9
ection was introduced at the midspan by mechanically tapping the specimen. The specimen was then
eely oscillate in the vertical (transverse) direction, and the load at one support was continuously
nd recorded (Fig. 5). Research Note FPL–RN–0382

decrement of Logarithmic
vibrational decay, δ, a measure
decrement of internal
of vibrational friction,
decay, was calculated
δ, a measure of using this formula
ations): internal friction, was calculated using this formula (for free
vibrations):

 1   A1 
Logarithmic decrement, δ =   ln   (4) (4)
 n − 1   An 

where A1 and An are the amplitudes of two oscillations n – 1

cycles apart.
d An are the amplitudes of two oscillations n – 1 cycles apart.
This approach follows classic vibration theory for a simply
h follows classic vibration theory for a simply supported homogenous beam. A more detailed
supported homogenous beam. A more detailed analysis,
proposed by Cai and others (1996), may yield a more representative value for logarithmic decrement.
as proposed by Cai and others (1996), may yield a more
s and Discussion
representative value for logarithmic decrement.

Results
ides a summary and
of data obtained Discussion
from the lumber samples used. Figure 6. Relationship between weighted grain angle
(WGA) mean value with all knots and logarithmic
ws a plot of weighted grain angle
Table 1 provides mean values
a summary versus
of data corresponding
obtained from the logarithmic decrement.
decrement values
specimens. For most samples
lumber of the specimens,
used. log decrement appears to be related to grain angle. However,
d from one specimen deviated significantly from this trend. Closer investigation of this specimen
Figure 6 shows a plot of weighted grain angle mean values
it had a large defect near its midlength. This defect, which consisted of a large knot and associated
versus corresponding logarithmic decrement values for all
ons, made up approximately 90% of the specimen’s cross section, as shown in Figure 7. A defect of
of the specimens. For most of the specimens, log decrement
de would dissipate a significant amount of energy.
appears to be related to grain angle. However, data obtained
e area surrounding
from them in lumberdeviated
one specimen have several characteristics
significantly from thisthat significantly affect strength.
trend.
is the tissue from a branch
Closer or limb of
investigation of this
a tree. Its fibers
specimen are aligned
revealed that itparallel
had a to its axis; hence, its fibers
with the majorlargeaxis defect
of a piece
nearofitslumber. Rather,
midlength. Thisknots in lumber
defect, are an anomalous interruption to
which consisted
aight grain. Second, theknot
of a large fibersand
surrounding
associatedagrain
knot distortions,
in a piece ofmade
lumber are formed in the
Figure 7. tree
Largein knot
a and associated grain distortions made
hich they flowup around the branch90%
approximately or stem.
of theConsequently,
specimen’s cross theysection,
also do not align upwith the major axis90% of the cross section of the deviant
approximately
lumber. Third,asthe cell wall
shown structure
in Figure 7. A of the fibers
defect of thissurrounding specimen.
a knot are significantly
magnitude would different
the fibers in clear woodaareas
dissipate of a piece
significant amountof lumber. Lastly, there exists a distinct boundary zone
of energy.
not and the surrounding woody material. Because of this significant anomaly, we did not include it in
Knots and the area surrounding them in lumber have several
g analysis.
characteristics that significantly affect strength. First, a
knot is the tissue from a branch or limb of a tree. Its fibers
are aligned parallel to its axis; hence, its fibers do not align
with the major axis of a piece of lumber. Rather, knots in
lumber are an anomalous interruption to otherwise straight
grain. Second, the fibers surrounding a knot in a piece of
lumber are formed in the tree in a manner in which they
flow around the branch or stem. Consequently, they also do
not align with the major axis of a piece of lumber. Third,
the cell wall structure of the fibers surrounding a knot are
significantly different from that of the fibers in clear wood
areas of a piece of lumber. Lastly, a distinct boundary zone
exists between a knot and the surrounding woody material.
Because of this significant anomaly, we did not include it in Figure 8. Relationship between weighted grain angle (WGA)
the following analysis. mean value with all knots and logarithmic decrement.
Figure 8 illustrates the relationship between grain angle
measurements with all knots and logarithmic decrement.
Figure 9 illustrates the relationship between grain angle
measurements with knots <23º and logarithmic decrement.
Note that a linear relationship exists, with an increase in
logarithmic decrement readings corresponding to increase
in grain angle. Figure 10 shows that a strong relationship
exists between grain angle and the number of knots found in
a specimen.

10
Nondestructive Evaluation of the Tensile Properties of Structural Lumber from the Spruce–Pine–Fir Species Grouping
Figure 9. Relationship between weighted grain angle
(WGA) mean value with knots that are <23º and
logarithmic decrement.
Concluding Comments
The presence of knots in a piece of lumber significantly
affects its value. For lumber that will be used in applications
where the appearance of the final product is of primary
importance, knots and associated grain distortions
(identified as grain angle) are considered significant defects
and are often removed during the manufacturing process.
Also, they are considered a significant strength-reducing
characteristic for structural lumber.
The results of this study indicate that as grain angle
increases, energy loss characteristics of structural lumber
increase. This is of significance to users of commercial
nondestructive evaluation equipment for grading structural
lumber. Based on these results, it may be possible to refine
their equipment to provide a more accurate means of
identifying lower strength pieces of lumber.
Literature Cited
Cai, Z.; Hunt, M.O.; Fridley, K.J.; Rosowsky, D.V. 1996.
New technique for measuring damping of longitudinal free
vibration in wood. ASTM Journal of Testing and Evaluation.
25(4): 456-460.
Cramer, S.M.; Fohrell, W.B. 1990. Method for simulating
tension performance for lumber members. Journal of
Structural Engineering. 116(10): 2719-2745.
Green, D.W.; McDonald, K.A. 1993a. Investigation of the
mechanical properties of red oak 2 by 4’s. Wood and Fiber
Science. 25(1): 35-45.
Green, D.W.; McDonald, K.A. 1993b. Mechanical
properties of red maple structural lumber. Wood and Fiber
Science. 25(4): 365-374.
Hoyle, R.J. 1968. Background to machine stress rating.
Forest Products Journal. 18(4): 87-97.
Figure 10. Relationship between weighted grain angle
(WGA) mean value with all knots and number of knots.
James, W.L.; Hamill, D.W. 1965. Dielectric properties of
Douglas-fir measured at microwave frequencies. Forest
Products Journal. 15(2): 51-56.
Kaiserlik, J.H.; Pellerin, R.F. 1977. Stress wave attenuation
as an indicator of lumber strength. Forest Products Journal.
27(6): 39-43.
Kellogg, R.M. 1981. Physical properties of wood. In:
Wangaard, F.F., ed., Wood — its structure and properties.
Volume 1. Clark C. Heritage Memorial Series on
Wood. Educational Modules for Materials Science and
Engineering. University Park, PA: Materials Research
Laboratory, The Pennsylvania State University: 195-223.
Lin, R.T. 1967. Review of the dielectric properties of wood
and cellulose. Forest Products Journal. 17(7): 61-66.
Martin, P.; Collet, R.; Barthclemy, P.; Roussy, G. 1987.
Evaluation of wood characteristics: Internal scanning of the
material by microwaves. Wood Science and Technology. 21:
361-371.
Metriguard Technologies, Inc. 2020. 511 grain angle meter.
https://metriguard.com/product/511-grain-angle-meter. (July
29, 2020).
Orosz, I. 1977. Relationships between transverse free
vibration E and other properties as affected by knots. Forest
Products Journal. 27(1): 23-27.
Pellerin, R.F.; Ross, R.J. 2015. Proof loading. Chapter 4. In:
Nondestructive evaluation of wood, second edition. General
Technical Report FPL-GTR-238. Madison, WI: U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Forest Products
Laboratory: 53-57.
Rajeshwar, B.; Bender, D.A.; Brey, D.E.; McDonald, K.A.
1997. An ultrasonic technique for predicting tensile strength
of southern pine lumber. Transactions of the American
Society of Agricultural Engineers. 40(4): 1153-1159.
11
 Research Note FPL–RN–0382

Ross, R.J. 2015. Nondestructive evaluation of wood, second

edition. General Technical Report FPL-GTR-238. Madison,
WI: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Forest
Products Laboratory. 167 p.
Skaar, C. 1948. The dielectric properties of wood at several
radio frequencies. Technical Publication No. 69. Syracuse,
New York: New York State College of Forestry.
Viguier, J. 2015. Improving strength grading of lumber by
grain angle measurement and mechanical modeling. Wood
Material Science & Engineering. 10(1): 145-156.

12