Evaluation of the Physical and Mechanical Properties of Pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) Wood Using Ultrasonic Transducers of Different Frequencies. P. 143–152

Complete text of the article:

Download article (pdf, 0.7MB )

UDС

691.113,620.179.161,681.586.48,539.413

DOI:

10.37482/0536-1036-2025-5-143-152

Abstract

Acoustic non-destructive testing has become widely used in assessing the technical quality and internal condition of wood in wooden structures and growing trees. Meanwhile, the type of wood, its moisture content and grain direction, the presence of defects, as well as the frequency of ultrasonic transducers can have a significant impact on measuring the ultrasonic velocity in wood. The development of the instrumentation base, as well as the inconsistency of the results of previous studies, have served as the basis for conducting a separate series of experiments to study the effect of the frequency of ultrasonic transducers on the accuracy of indirect determination of the density, deformability and strength of wood under static bending. The research has been carried out on 176 samples of Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) wood using ultrasonic devices Pulsar 2.2 (LLC SPE “Interpribor”, Chelyabinsk, Russia) and Pundit PL-200 (Proceq SA, Schwerzenbach, Switzerland) using ultrasonic transducers with nominal frequencies of 24, 54, 60 and 150 kHz. It has been confirmed that the frequency of ultrasonic transducers significantly affects the signal velocity and the dynamic modulus of elasticity, and that the density of wood is not related to the ultrasonic signal velocity. It has been established that the accuracy of predicting the modulus of elasticity and the ultimate strength of wood under static bending, estimated by the coefficient of determination (R2 = 0.88–0.91) of linear models of the relationship between these parameters and the dynamic modulus of elasticity, does not depend on the frequency of the ultrasonic transducer. At the same time, the quality of models for predicting the physico-chemical properties of wood by the ultrasound velocity is significantly lower compared to the dynamic modulus of elasticity parameter. The obtained regression models can be used for non-destructive evaluation of the mechanical properties of wood in growing pine trees and in the elements of wooden structures by the acoustic transmission method, and further research will be aimed at studying the variability of acoustic parameters of pine wood in growing trees.

Authors

Aleksandr S. Korolev*, Candidate of Engineering; ResearcherID: JKI-0714-2023,
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0000-1370-1285
Evgenii S. Sharapov, Doctor of Engineering, Assoc. Prof.; ResearcherID: B-8151-2014,
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6500-5377
Anton O. Bykov, Engineer; ResearcherID: KFR-1574-2024,
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0006-3429-5902
Oleg S. Egoshin, Postgraduate Student; ResearcherID: HLQ-6804-2023,
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0002-8076-8345

Affiliation

Volga State University of Technology, pl. Lenina, 3, Yoshkar-Ola, 424000, Russian Federation; korolevas@volgatech.net*, sharapoves@volgatech.net, anton_bykov02@mail.ru, egoshin.o.s@mail.ru

Keywords

dynamic modulus of elasticity, non-destructive testing, wood density, wood strength, ultrasonic signal velocity, ultrasound, ultrasonic transducer

For citation

Korolev A.S., Sharapov E.S., Bykov A.O., Egoshin O.S. Evaluation of the Physical and Mechanical Properties of Pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) Wood Using Ultrasonic Transducers of Different Frequencies. Lesnoy Zhurnal = Russian Forestry Journal, 2025, no. 5, pp. 143–152. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.37482/0536-1036-2025-5-143-152

References

1. Bobyleva Yu.N., Davydov S.L., Zaretskij-Feoktistov G.G. On the Issue of Determining the Elastic Parameters of Wood Using the Ultrasonic Method. Lesnoy Zhurnal = Russian Forestry Journal, 1978, no. 3, pp. 156–159. (In Russ.). Окончание табл. 3
2. Kobzar A.I. Applied Mathematical Statistics. For Engineers and Scientists. Moscow, FIZMATLIT Publ., 2006. 816 p. (In Russ.).
3. Kolesnikova A.A. The Study of Wood Properties Based on Core Samples: Scientific Publication. Yoshkar-Ola, Mari State Technical University Publ., 2002. 178 p. (In Russ.).
4. Lakatosh B.K. Wood Flaw Detection. Moscow, Lesnaya promyshlennost’ Publ., 1966. 182 p. (In Russ.).
5. Fedyaev A.A., Chubinskij A.N. Non-Destructive Methods of Testing the Properties of Wood Products. St. Petersburg, GALANIKA Publ., 2022. 118 p. (In Russ.).
6. Arriaga F., Llana D.F., Esteban M., Íñiguez-González G. Influence of Length and Sensor Positioning on Acoustic Time-of-Flight (ToF) Measurement in Structural Timber. Holzforschung, 2017, vol. 71, iss. 9, pp. 713–723. https://doi.org/10.1515/hf-2016-0214
7. Arriaga F., Osuna-Sequera C., Bobadilla I., Esteban M. Prediction of the Mechanical Properties of Timber Members in Existing Structures Using the Dynamic Modulus of Elasticity and Visual Grading Parameters. Construction and Building Materials, 2022, vol. 322, art. no. 126512. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2022.126512
8. Baar J., Tippner J., Rademacher P. Prediction of Mechanical Properties – Modulus of Rupture and Modulus of Elasticity – of Five Tropical Species by Nondestructive Methods. Maderas. Ciencia y tecnología, 2015, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 239–252. https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-221X2015005000023
9. Bucur V. Acoustics of Wood. Berlin, Heidelberg, Springer, 2006. 394 p. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-30594-7
10. Downes G.M., Lausberg M., Potts B.M., Pilbeam D.L., Bird M., Bradshaw B. Application of the IML Resistograph to the Infield Assessment of Basic Density in Plantation Eucalypts. Australian Forestry, 2018, vol. 81, iss. 3, pp. 177–185. https://doi.org/10.1080/00049158.2018.1500676
11. Kang H., Booker R.E. Variation of Stress Wave Velocity with MC and Temperature. Wood Science and Technology, 2002, vol. 36, pp. 41–54. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00226-001-0129-x
12. Kloiber M., Reinprecht L., Hrivnák J., Tippner J. Comparative Evaluation of Acoustic Techniques for Detection of Damages in Historical Wood. Journal of Cultural Heritage, 2016, vol. 20, pp. 622–631. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.culher.2016.02.009
13. Kohlhauser C., Hellmich C., Vitale-Brovarone C., Boccaccini A.R., Rota A., Eberhardsteiner J. Ultrasonic Characterisation of Porous Biomaterials Across Different Frequencies. Strain, 2009, vol. 45, iss. 1, pp. 34–44. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-1305.2008.00417.x
14. Llana D.F., Short I., Harte A.M. Use of Non-Destructive Test Methods on Irish Hardwood Standing Trees and Small-Diameter Round Timber for Prediction of Mechanical Properties. Annals of Forest Science, 2020, vol. 77, art. no. 62. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13595-020-00957-x
15. Mora C.R., Schimleck L.R., Isik F., Mahon J.M., Clark A., Daniels R.F. Relationships between Acoustic Variables and Different Measures of Stiffness in Standing Pinus taeda Trees. Canadian Journal of Research, 2009, vol. 39, no. 8, pp. 1421–1429. https://doi.org/10.1139/X09-062
16. Nowak T.P., Jasieńko J., Hamrol-Bielecka K. In situ Assessment of Structural Timber Using the Resistance Drilling Method – Evaluation of Usefulness. Construction and Building Materials, 2016, vol. 102, part 1, pp. 403–415. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2015.11.004
17. Proto A.R., Macrì G., Bernardini V., Russo D., Zimbalatti G. Acoustic Evaluation of Wood Quality with a Non-Destructive Method in Standing Trees: a First Survey in Italy. iForest – Biogeosciences and Forestry, 2017, vol. 10, iss. 4, pp. 700–706. https://doi.org/10.3832/ifor2065-010
18. Ross R.J., Pellerin R.F. Nondestructive Testing for Assessing Wood Members in Structures: a Review. General Technical Report FPL, GTR-70. US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 1994. 39 p. https://doi.org/10.2737/FPL-GTR-70
19. Sharapov E., Brischke C., Militz H., Smirnova E. Prediction of Modulus of Elasticity in Static Bending and Density of Wood at Different Moisture Contents and Feed Rates by Drilling Resistance Measurements. European Journal of Wood and Wood Products, 2019, vol. 77, pp. 833–842. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00107-019-01439-2
20. Sharapov E., Demakov Yu., Korolev A. Effect of Plantation Density on Some Physical and Technological Parameters of Scots Pine (Pinus sylvestris L.). Forests, 2024, vol. 15, no. 2, art. no. 233. https://doi.org/10.3390/f15020233
21. Tippner J., Hrivnák J., Kloiber M. Experimental Evaluation of Mechanical Properties of Softwood Using Acoustic Methods. BioResources, 2016, vol. 11, iss. 1, pp. 503–518. https://doi.org/10.15376/biores.11.1.503-518
22. Vázquez C., Gonçalves R., Bertoldo C., Baño V., Vega A., Crespo J., Guaita M. Determination of the Mechanical Properties of Castanea sativa Mill. Using Ultrasonic Wave Propagation and Comparison with Static Compression and Bending Methods. Wood Science and Technology, 2015, vol. 49, pp. 607–622. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00226-015-0719-7
23. Wang S.-Y., Chuang S.-T. Experimental Data Correction of the Dynamic Elastic Moduli, Velocity and Density of Solid Wood as a Function of Moisture Content above the Fiber Saturation Point. Holzforschung, 2000, vol. 54, iss. 3, pp. 309–314. https://doi.org/10.1515/HF.2000.052
24. Wang S.-Y., Lin C.-J., Chiu C.-M. The Adjusted Dynamic Modulus of Elasticity Above the Fiber Saturation Point in Taiwania Plantation Wood by Ultrasonic-Wave Measurement. Holzforschung, 2003, vol. 57, iss. 5, pp. 547–552. https://doi.org/10.1515/HF.2003.081
25. Wang X. Acoustic Measurements on Trees and Logs: a Review and Analysis. Wood Science and Technology, 2013, vol. 47, pp. 965–975. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00226-013-0552-9
26. Wang X., Ross R.J., McClellan M., Barbour J., Erickson J.R., Forsman J.W., McGinnis G.D. Strength and Stiffness Assessment of Standing Trees Using a Nondestructive Stress Wave Technique. Research Paper FPL, RP–585. US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 2000. 9 p.
27. Wang X., Ross R.J., Carter P. Acoustic Evaluation of Wood Quality in Standing Trees. Part I. Acoustic Wave Behavior. Wood and Fiber Science, 2007, vol. 39, no. 1, pp. 28–38.
28. Yang H., Yu L., Wang L. Effect of Moisture Content on the Ultrasonic Acoustic Properties of Wood. Journal of Forestry Research, 2015, vol. 26, pp. 753–757. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11676-015-0079-z