Cited by 59Wood Treatment and PropertiesUltrasonics and Acoustic Wave PropagationStructural Engineering and Materials Analysis

A comparative study of using static and ultrasonic material testing methods to determine the anisotropic material properties of wood

Dackermann, Ulrike, Elsener, Roman, Li, Jianchun, Crews, Keith·2016·Construction and Building Materials

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2015.07.195

Cites

32 of 32 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Authors
Dackermann, U., Elsener, R., Li, J., & Crews, K.
Affiliations
University of Technology Sydney (AU)
Corresponding author
Dackermann, Ulrike
Venue
Construction and Building Materials
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-01
Volume
102
Pages
963-976
ISSN
0950-0618 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1182431955
Cited by
59
References
32
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 3
FWCI
2.72
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Construction and Building Materials (publishedVersion)
  • UTS ePRESS (University of Technology Sydney) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Australian Research Council (LP110200162)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Building and Construction › Wood Treatment and Properties
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Mechanics of Materials › Ultrasonics and Acoustic Wave Propagation
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Civil and Structural Engineering › Structural Engineering and Materials Analysis
Keywords
wood anisotropy, orthotropic material properties, ultrasonic testing, radial direction, tangential direction, hardwood, elastic properties, test calibration

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review