CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 5Wood Treatment and PropertiesStructural Engineering and Materials AnalysisNon-Destructive Testing Techniques

Nondestructive Evaluation of 2 by 10 Southern Pine Lumber

Open access
Uzcategui, M. G. C., França, F. J. N., Seale, R. D., Senalik, C. A., Ross, R. J.·2023·Forest Products Journal
DOI 10.13073/fpj-d-22-00054
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Efficient use of the available wood resources is necessary to sustainably meet the long-term demand for wood products. This paper presents research about the potential of using transverse and longitudinal vibration techniques to evaluate the bending modulus of elasticity MOE (E b) and tensile properties (E t and UTS) of 2 by 10 No. 2 grade southern pine (Pinus spp.) lumber. A total of 285 lumber pieces were first nondestructively tested using longitudinal vibration (Director HM 200), transverse vibration (Metriguard E-computer), and proof-loading bending tests (Universal Instron Machine). Each specimen was then destructively tested in tension parallel to the grain to determine tension modulus of elasticity (E t) and ultimate tensile stress (UTS). Correlations between growth characteristics, physical, and mechanical properties were analyzed. Excellent correlative relationships between longitudinal and transverse dMOE with the elastic properties E b, and E t were found. A strong correlation was also found between the elastic properties E b and E t. The prediction of E b was improved after adding density to the model. The estimation of UTS was also improved with the addition of density and a secondary nondestructive measurement. Nondestructive techniques are recommended to assess the mechanical properties of southern pine 2 by 10 lumber.

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

This study evaluated longitudinal and transverse vibration nondestructive techniques to predict bending modulus of elasticity, tension modulus of elasticity, and ultimate tensile stress in 285 pieces of 2 by 10 No. 2 southern pine lumber. It found that dynamic MOE strongly predicts bending and tension MOE, while UTS prediction improved modestly when density and frequency-domain area were added.

Key findings

  • Dynamic MOE from transverse and longitudinal vibration correlated strongly with bending MOE (r = 0.865 and 0.826, respectively) and tension MOE (r = 0.885 and 0.887, respectively); bending MOE and tension MOE also correlated strongly (r = 0.785).
  • For bending MOE, transverse-vibration dMOE alone gave R² = 0.75, and adding density improved it to R² = 0.77; longitudinal-vibration dMOE alone gave R² = 0.68, and adding density improved it to R² = 0.72. For tension MOE, dMOE alone gave R² = 0.78 (transverse) and 0.79 (longitudinal), and adding density did not improve the estimate.
  • For UTS, density was the best single predictor (R² = 0.33); density plus transverse dMOE increased R² to 0.40, and density plus longitudinal dMOE plus FDA gave the best UTS model (R² = 0.45). Overall UTS mean was 24.42 MPa with a COV of 47.67%.
  • Length (14 ft vs. 16 ft) did not significantly affect bending or tensile properties at alpha = 0.05.

Methods

  • The sample consisted of 285 pieces of 2 by 10 No. 2 KD southern pine structural lumber: 85 pieces at 14 ft and 200 pieces at 16 ft, conditioned to 12% moisture content before testing.
  • Nondestructive tests used longitudinal vibration (Director HM 200), transverse vibration (Metriguard E-computer), and proof-loading four-point bending; all pieces were then destructively tested in tension parallel to the grain to measure tension MOE and UTS.
  • Analyses included descriptive statistics, Pearson bivariate correlations, and stepwise multiple linear regression predicting bending MOE, tension MOE, and UTS from dMOE, density, and FDA, using SAS version 9.4 per ASTM D2915-17.

Limitations

  • The paper does not state an explicit limitations section. Evident from the text: the sample is limited to 285 pieces of 2 by 10 No. 2 KD southern pine from two lengths (14 ft and 16 ft) conditioned to 12% moisture content, so findings may not generalize to other grades, sizes, species, or moisture conditions.
  • Evident from the text: UTS prediction remained modest even with the best model (R² = 0.45), and UTS had high variability (COV = 47.67%), making NDT-based UTS estimates less reliable than stiffness estimates.
  • The paper notes that wood’s anatomical variability and naturally occurring defects such as knots, grain angle, reaction wood, and decay can reduce strength properties and challenge manufacturers and end-users, but it does not frame this as a study limitation.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.13073/fpj-d-22-00054

Cites

13 of 13 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Claims the paper makes

1 of 17 cited sources checked · 1 supported · 0 flagged

  • Findingcitation

    The improved R2 found for UTS in this study is comparable to the ones reported by Senalik et al. (2020) and Correa et al. (2022).

    “The improved R 2 found for UTS in this study is comparable to the ones reported by Senalik et al. (2020) and Correa et al. (2022).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Senalik et al. (2020) source
    • cites Correa et al. (2022) source
    • The authors state this as an assumption: The mechanical properties Eb, Et, and UTS are linear functions of density and NDT properties (and FDA for UTS) as specified in the regression models.
  • Findingown data

    The prediction of Eb was improved after adding density to the model.

    “The prediction of E b was improved after adding density to the model.”
    • Also stated in: § Results and Discussion · plain
      “For E b , the combination of dMOE tv with density presented a slightly higher coefficient of determination (R 2 ¼ 0.77) when compared with a single predictor (R 2 ¼ 0.75; dMOE tv ).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: The mechanical properties Eb, Et, and UTS are linear functions of density and NDT properties (and FDA for UTS) as specified in the regression models.
  • Findingown data

    FDA presented a potential relationship with UTS (r = -0.383).

    “FDA presented a potential relationship with UTS (r ¼ À0.383).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Findingown data

    Density had notable correlations with all three mechanical properties.

    “Density had notable correlations with all three mechanical properties.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Findingown data

    A strong correlation was found between Eb and Et.

    “A strong correlation was found between E b and E t (r ¼ 0.785).”
    • Also stated in: § Abstract · boosted
      “A strong correlation was also found between the elastic properties E b and E t .”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 1
  • May combine two claims. 14
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 11

  • The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingown data

    The addition of density did not improve Et estimation with either NDT technique.

    “The combination of dMOE tv þ density improved the prediction of E b but did not improve that of E t .”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: The mechanical properties Eb, Et, and UTS are linear functions of density and NDT properties (and FDA for UTS) as specified in the regression models.

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The overall dMOE long mean was 10,094 MPa, with range 4,614 to 19,635 MPa and COV 24.77 percent.

    “The overall dMOE long mean value for both lengths tested was 10,094 MPa, with a range from 4,614 to 19,635 Mpa with a COV of 24.77 percent.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    For Eb, the combination of dMOE tv with density had R2 = 0.77, slightly higher than the single predictor dMOE tv R2 = 0.75.

    “For E b , the combination of dMOE tv with density presented a slightly higher coefficient of determination (R 2 ¼ 0.77) when compared with a single predictor (R 2 ¼ 0.75; dMOE tv ).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: The mechanical properties Eb, Et, and UTS are linear functions of density and NDT properties (and FDA for UTS) as specified in the regression models.

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The mean UTS was 24.42 MPa, with range 7.40 to 72.97 MPa and COV 47.67 percent.

    “The mean for UTS was 24.42 Mpa, ranging from 7.40 to 72.97 Mpa with a COV of 47.67 percent.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The overall mean Et was 9,735 MPa, with range 4,415 to 18,548 MPa and COV 25.62 percent.

    “For E t , the overall mean was 9,735 Mpa, ranging between 4,415 Mpa and 18,548 Mpa with a COV of 25.62 percent.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The specimens evaluated meet the SPIB No. 2 grade lumber RPI and LW percentage requirements.

    “Our results show that the specimens evaluated meet the SPIB No. 2 grade lumber RPI and LW percentage requirements.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites SPIB 2014

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    The average moisture content when pieces were tested was 11.82 percent.

    “The average moisture content (MC) when pieces were tested was 11.82 percent.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    For Eb and Et, the correlation with density was moderate (r = 0.642 and r = 0.514, respectively).

    “For E b and E t the correlation with density was moderate (r ¼ 0.642 and r ¼ 0.514, respectively).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The overall density mean of the 2 by 10 southern pine lumber was 547 kg/m3, with minimum 436 kg/m3 and maximum 754 kg/m3.

    “The overall density mean, minimum, and maximum were 547 kg/m 3 , 436 kg/m 3 , and 754 kg/m 3 , respectively.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    For Eb, the highest correlations were with dMOE tv (r = 0.865) and dMOE long (r = 0.826).

    “E b | 0.064 (0.2833) | 0.461 (,0.0001) | 0.508 (,0.0001) | 0.642 (,0.0001) | 0.865 (,0.0001) | 0.826 (,0.0001) | À0.251 (,0.0001) | 1”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The mean RPI was 3.82, with minimum 1.67 and maximum 15.67.

    “The mean, minimum, and maximum for RPI were 3.82, 1.67, and 15.67, respectively.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The overall dMOE tv mean was 10,447 MPa, with minimum 4,850 MPa, maximum 19,658 MPa, and COV 24.87 percent.

    “The overall mean for dMOE tv tested (both lengths combined) was 10,447 Mpa with a minimum of 4,850 Mpa, a maximum of 19,658 Mpa, and a COV of 24.87 percent.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The overall mean Eb was 13,365 MPa, with range 7,162 to 22,103 MPa and COV 21.88 percent.

    “The overall mean for E b was 13,365 Mpa.The minimum and maximum values ranged between 7,162 Mpa and 22,103 Mpa, with a COV of 21.88 percent.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The mean LW was 45.02 percent, with minimum 21.09 percent, maximum 76.56 percent, and COV 21.07 percent.

    “For LW (%), the mean was 45.02 percent; the minimum was 21.09 percent, the maximum was 76.56 percent and the coefficient of variation (COV) was 21.07 percent.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The combination of density and dMOE tv or of density, dMOE long, and FDA increased the ability to estimate UTS.

    “As previously stated, the combination of density and dMOE tv or of density, dMOE long , and FDA increased the ability to estimate UTS (see Fig. 5).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: The mechanical properties Eb, Et, and UTS are linear functions of density and NDT properties (and FDA for UTS) as specified in the regression models.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    In 1967, Doyle and Markwardt found an overall mean of 23.44 for UTS obtained from No. 2 KD southern pine lumber (sizes 2 by 4, 2 by 6, and 2 by 8).

    “In 1967, Doyle and Markwardt found an overall mean of 23.44 for UTS obtained from No. 2 KD southern pine lumber (sizes 2 by 4, 2 by 6, and 2 by 8).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Doyle and Markwardt

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Tension parallel to the grain is one of the fundamental properties of wood.

    “Tension parallel to the grain is one of the fundamental properties of wood (Doyle and Markwardt 1967).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Doyle and Markwardt 1967

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    The high level of strength exhibited by a piece of wood when exposed to a tension force is related to its anatomical features such as fiber orientation, fiber arrangement, and thickness of cell walls.

    “The high level of strength exhibited by a piece of wood when exposed to a tension force is related to its anatomical features such as fiber orientation, fiber arrangement, and thickness of cell walls (Record 1914).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Record 1914

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Several authors have found excellent correlative relationships between MOE and dMOE using the longitudinal and transverse vibration technique.

    “Several authors have found excellent correlative relationships between MOE and dMOE using the longitudinal and transverse vibration technique (Wang et al. 1993;Yang et al. 2015;Franc ¸a et al. 2018aFranc ¸a et al. , 2020b)).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Wang et al. 1993

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites Yang et al. 2015

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites França et al. 2018a

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Previous authors (França et al. 2020a) noted the same difference among techniques.

    “Previous authors (Franc ¸a et al. 2020a) noted the same difference among techniques.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites França et al. 2020a

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Doyle and Markwardt (1967) evaluated properties from 496 specimens (2 by 4, 2 by 6, and 2 by 8 sizes) and correlated the results with flatwise nondestructive bending tests.

    “The authors evaluated properties from 496 specimens (2 by 4, 2 by 6, and 2 by 8 sizes) and correlated the results with the ones obtained from flatwise nondestructive bending tests.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Doyle and Markwardt 1967

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    The transverse vibration technique allows evaluation of dMOE by measuring the oscillation frequency in the vertical direction generated after a lumber piece is slightly deflected at the midspan.

    “This method allows the evaluation of dMOE by measuring the oscillation frequency in the vertical direction generated after a lumber piece is slightly deflected at the midspan of the lumber piece (Franc ¸a et al. 2018a(Franc ¸a et al. , 2019b)).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites França et al. 2018a

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites França et al. 2019b

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    SPIB guidelines specify that southern pine lumber should have four or more annual rings per inch on either one end or the other of the piece to be considered a No. 2 grade.

    “SPIB guidelines specify that southern pine lumber should have four or more annual rings per inch on either one end or the other of the piece to be considered a No. 2 grade.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites SPIB 2014

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    An improvement in the estimation of UTS using dMOE (longitudinal vibration) and additional parameters such as time-domain area (TDA) and frequency-domain area (FDA) as predictor variables was done in an experimental study by Senalik et al. (2020).

    “An improvement in the estimation of UTS using dMOE (longitudinal vibration) and additional parameters such as the time-domain area (TDA) and frequency-domain area (FDA) as predictor variables was done in an experimental study by Senalik et al. (2020).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Senalik et al. (2020) source

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Senalik et al. (2020) conducted a study to understand how wood's natural occurring effects and acoustic properties can help estimate ultimate tension stress (UTS).

    “A more recent study was conducted by Senalik et al. (2020) to understand how wood's natural occurring effects and the acoustic properties of wood can be of help in the estimation of ultimate tension stress (UTS).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Senalik et al. (2020) source
25 of 25

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    The mechanical properties Eb, Et, and UTS are linear functions of density and NDT properties (and FDA for UTS) as specified in the regression models.

    “The variables E b , E t , and UTS were used as multiple linear functions of density and NDT properties.”
1 of 1

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Ross, R. J. 2008. Transverse vibration techniques: Logs to structural systems. In: Proceedings of the 15th International Symposium on Nondestructive Testing of Wood: September 10–12, 2007. Forest Products Society, Madison, Wisconsin pp. 13–15. ISBN: 9781892529527: 1892529521.
  2. Wang, Z., Ross, R. J. and Murphy.J. F. 1993. A comparison of several NDE techniques for determining the modulus of elasticity of lumber. World Forestry Res. 6(4): 86– 88.
  3. Yang, B. Z., Seale, R. D. Shmulsky, R. Dahlen, J. and Wang.X. 2015. Comparison of nondestructive testing methods for evaluating No. 2 southern pine lumber: Part A, modulus of elasticity. Wood Fiber Sci. 47(4): 375– 384.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Uzcategui, M. G. C., França, F. J. N., Seale, R. D., Senalik, C. A., & Ross, R. J.
Affiliations
Mississippi State University (US)
ORCID
Venue
Forest Products Journal
Publisher
Forest Products Society
Published
2023-05
Volume
73
Issue
3
Pages
186-193
ISSN
  • 0015-7473 (ISSN-L)
  • 2376-9637
DOI
10.13073/fpj-d-22-00054
OpenAlex
W4385232309
Cited by
5
References
13
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1
FWCI
0.60
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Forest Products Journal (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Building and Construction › Wood Treatment and Properties
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Civil and Structural Engineering › Structural Engineering and Materials Analysis
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Mechanical Engineering › Non-Destructive Testing Techniques
Keywords
non-destructive testing, longitudinal vibration, transverse vibration, elastic modulus, tensile properties, ultimate tensile strength, density, wood mechanical properties, growth traits

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.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-16.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-16.

Cited sources are checked by gpt-6-sol.

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