Sie sind auf Seite 1von 24

Wood Science and Technology

Vol. 3 (1969) p. 49--73

Stress Relaxation of Wood at Several Levels of Strain*,**

By RAtioN EC~E~IqUE-MAsmIQTJE,

M6xico, D. F.

Summary

Stress relaxation tests were performed with six tropical American species. S~ress relaxation was not found to be a linear function of strain at any level of strain. At equal low levels of strain, stress relaxation in compression was much greater than in tension. A mechanical model consisting of an isolated spring in parallel with a spring and dashpot in series was used as an aid in the derivation of equations describing stress relaxation. An attempt to apply 5~ewtonian viscous theory to the model was unsuccessful in accounting

for rate of relaxation.

mathematically derived curves fitted the data very wall. Stress relaxation appears to be related to "departure strain" which may be obtained readily from static stress strain diagrams.

However, when the hyperbolic sine law of viscous flow was applied,

Zusammenfassung

Versuche fiber die Sparmungsrelaxation wurden mit sechs tropischen Holzarten Amerikas durehgeffihrt. Es erwies sich, dab die Spannungsrelaxation nicht in jedem Bereich der Deh- nung eine lineare Funktion dieser Dehnung ist. In vergleichbar niedrigen Dehnungsbereiehen zeigte sich zum Beispiel, dal~ die Spannungsrelaxation bei Druek grSBer ist als bei Zugbean- spruchung. Mit Hilfe eines meehanisehen Modells, bestehend aus einer einzelnen Feder in Parallelschaltung zu einer Feder mit D~mpfungselement wurden Gleichungen zur Beschrei- bung der Spannungsrelaxation abgeleitet. Der Versuch die NEWTONschen Viskosit~tsgesetze auf dieses Modell anzuwenden, sehlug aufgrund der Relaxationsgeschwindigkeit fehl. Bei Anwendung des hyperbolischen Sinussatzes ffir viskoses Flie$en stimmten jedoch die ermittelten Werte recht gut mit den mathematiseh berechneten Kurvenwerten fiberein. Die Spannungsre]axation scheint mit der sogenannten ,,Anfangsdehnung" zusammen- zuh~ngen, wie man sie stets bei statischen Spannungs-Dehnungsschaubfldern erh~lt.

Introduction

Wood together with many other structural materials is commonly considered to behave elastically at stresses below the so-called proportional limit, that is, the stress strain relationship for wood follows HOO~E's law. For most practical pur- poses this description is adequate. However, it has been observed that wood has properties dependent on time which cannot be fully explained using Hookean elastic theory alone. In the last few years investigators have made use of visco- elastic theory in their attempts to characterize and understand time effects on the strength of wood.

* A condensation of a dissertation submitted to the faculty of the Yale School of Forestry as partial fulfillment of the requirements of the D. For. degree. ** This research is part of a comprehensive study being conducted at the Yale School of Forestry in cooperation with the Office of Naval 1%esearch, I)epartment of the Navy, under Contract ~qonr 609 (13), Project MR 330-001, Properties of Tropical Woods. The author acknowledges the fellowships granted by the Organization of American States, and the Instituto ~qacional de la Investigaci6n Cientifica de M6xico. The author wishes to thank Professor FREDERICKF. WANGAARDfor his counsel and assistance, and Professors ROBERT M. KELLOGG and ROBERT P. VREELAND for encouragement and assistance.

50

I~AMONECHENIQUE-MANRIQUE

The present study was undertaken to investigate the rheological properties of wood in stress relaxation. A material shows relaxation when it is subjected to a deformation which is held constant, and the stress to hold it so diminishes or relaxes with time. Tests were conducted in tension and compression parallel to the grain at low and high strain levels for a period of eight hours at constant temperature and humidity. In order to obtain results that would represent a wide range of wood behavior a number of widely different species of tropical hardwoods were chosen. This study was designed to investigate the suitability of simple mechanical models as an aid in the characterization of stress-relaxation behavior in the strain-level range where no non-recoverable flow was present. Two theories were used to predict viscous behavior--one of them based on NEWTOn'S :law of viscous flow and the other on the hyperbolic sine law. Perfectly viscous liquids deform in accordance with Newton's law where the stress is always directly proportional to the rate of strain but independent of the strain itself [AL]~aEY 1948 ; FEaltY 1961]. The deformation of imperfectly viscous liquids is characterized by several theories, one of which is the hyperbolic sine law of viscous flow [HALSEY, WHITE, EYRI:NG 1945; TOBOLSKY, EYRI~G 1943]. If a material displays linear viscoelastic behavior, its mechanical properties can be duplicated in close approximation by means of :models consisting of suitable combinations of springs which deform according to HOOKE's law, and of viscous dashpots which follow NEWTOn's law of viscosity [FERRY 1961].

Most of the work on the time-dependent properties of wood has dealt with creep and only a relatively small fraction has dealt with stress relaxation [KHu- KB:IZYA~SKII1953 ; KInGSTOn, CLARKE 1961 a; KITAZAWA1947; MINA~I 1953 a; YOlJ~GS 1957]. It has been reported that the higher the initial strain, the higher the rate and amount of relaxation [GaosS~tAI~ 1954; KInGSTon, CLARKE 1961a; KITAZAWA 1947; MI~AzciI 1953a; YOUNGS 1957]. When simple mechanical models are used to characterize stress relaxation, a MAXWELL unit consisting of a spring and dashpoVin series is in most cases l he component of the model which depicts the stress:relaxation. The stress in the MAXWELL unit decays according to the expression Ft = F o e -(k/~l)t where Ft is the stress at time t, F 0 is the initial stress, ]c is the Hookean spring constant, and U is the I~ewtonian viscosity of the dashpot. Thus, according to this equation the stress relaxes exponentially with time. The stress :relaxes to 1/e of its original value after a time equal to ~]/k has elapsed. The ratio ~//c is consequently called "relaxation time" for the material and is represented by the symbol v [MI~AMI

1953a].

ALFI~EY [1948] and LEADERI~][AN [1943] summarize the opinions of other investigators and point out the necessity for a distribution of "relaxation times" in order to depict more accurately the behavior of a material. They state that experiments, as well as the structure of high polymers, force the conclusion that configurational elasticity cannot be considered with a single "relaxation time", but should be thought of as a series of mechanisms each with a different "relaxation tilne".

been

studied and from the idea that wood evidences a "retardation spectrum", it can

be said that relaxation phenomena in wood can be depicted more accurately by

From considerations

of similarity with other high polymers that

have

Stress Relaxation of Wood at Several Levels

of Strair~

51

the use of a "relaxation spectrum". LEADEI~A:N [1943] mentions that computing the distribution function of relaxation times from any experimentally observed relaxation curve is a very difficult if not an impossible process. However, the reverse in which one assumes a distribution is not as difficult. Most investigators have either employed models based on the theory of linear viscoelasticity for the characterization of creep and relaxation phenomena in wood [B~ATNAGAa 1964; ETHINGTON, YOUNGS 1964; G~0SS~[AN, KINGSTON 1954; KOLL~ANN 1960; IDENTONEY,DAVIDSON 1962], or they have fitted empirical mathematical expressions to their results [CLoUSER 1959 ; GaOSS~AN 1954 ; KING 1961; KITAHA~A, YUKAWA 1964; KITAZAWA 1947; MINAMI 1953a; YOUNGS 1957 ; YOUNGS, HILBRAND 1963]. In general the conclusion of most investigators in the past has been that wood's time-dependent behavior approximates that of a linear body at least at low levels of strain [CSIRO 1962; CSIRO 1964; AR~ISTRONG 1960; BHATNAGAI~ 1964; ETHINGTON, YOUNGS 1964; FUJITA, NAXATO 1965; KING 1961; KINGSTON, CLARKE 1961a; KINGSTON 1962; MINA~ 1953b; YOUNGS, HILBRAND 1963]. This concept of linearity for wood at low strains will be discussed in more detail in analyzing the results of this study. The theory of linear viscoelasticity is definitely not well suited when high strains are imposed for in this range the strains are no longer proportional to the stresses. It has been reported that when Newtonian theory has been used, a single "retardation time" is not sufficient to depict creep behavior at low stresses [ALFREY 1948; LEADER~A1N 1943]. Changing from a linear dashpot to a non- linear element has the effect of adding more elements to the original linear model [JAYNE 1962]. Thus, it was thought in planning this study that the non-Newtonian model would offer a better opportunity than the Newtonian model for character- izing the experimentally observed relaxation.

Materials and Equipment

Six tropical hardwood species were chosen to undergo stress relaxation tests in compression and tension. They were selected according to published criteria [KELLOGG 1960; KING 1961] in an attempt to uncover a wide range of relaxation properties. The common and scientific names of these six species together with their physical and mechanical properties are shown in Table 1. The standard tension parallel to the grain specimen as specified in ASTM Designation 143-52 [ASTM 1961] was chosen for tension tests. However, due to loading limitations the compression specimens were only 0.75 in. • 0.75 in. X 2.5 in. in size. All specimens of a species were cut from a single board and were matched for the different levels of strain at which tests were conducted. In the case of three species, the tension specimens were prepared from laminated stock. In these cases the center lamination comprising the actual test material was of matched stock. Before and after machining, the material was stored in a room with an equilibrium moisture content of 12 percent. After the specimens had come to equilibrinm, their critical dimensions were measured to an accuracy of 0.001 in. Two SR-4 wire paper-backed electrical strain gages were bonded to each specimen. The manufacturer's instructions were followed in bonding the strain gages, and Dueo cement was the bonding agent used. They were placed on opposite faces of the

52

RAMONECHENIQuE-MANRIQUE

specimen parallel to the direction of stress, and wired in series. By placing the strain gages in the described manner, bending effects were cancelled and only axial strains were measured [PERRY, LISSNER 1955]. Insulated copper wire was soldered to the terminals of the gages as lead wires to the strain indicator. The wires were secured to the specimen by means of adhesive tape so as to avoid any transmittance of load from the copper wires to the gages during handling. The gages were then covered with aluminum foil as protection against mechanical damage and rapid changes in atmospheric humidity. The experimental apparatus consisted basically of two parallel threaded steel rods joined by two thick steel plates to which the attachments to support the

specimen were fixed. The upper steel plate could be moved to any desired position along the parallel steel rods so as to aeeomodate the size and type of specimen to be tested. The distance separating the l~-in, diameter parallel steel rods was 7 inches. This small separation distance, together with the fact that the steel plates were 2 inches thick by 3 89inches wide, minimized bending of the plates. The lower steel plate served basically as a stiffener and a base for tension or com- pression attachments. The upper steel plate served also as a stiffener, but the mechanism to apply load and maintain constant deformation was attached to it.

The load applicator consisted of a l~-in, diameter

long" with 32 threads per inch for a distance of 3~ in. starting from the ends. The

central portion of the rod was

could be introduced once the rod had been placed through the upper steel plate. The key at the central portion was intended to keep the rod from rotating when- ever the upper or lower nut attached to it was turned. In this manner, the 10ad was applied to the specimen by the vertical movement of the central rod. In or- der to rotate the nut smoothly, thrust bearings were placed between the steel plate and the nuts. Fig. 1 shows the arrangement used in tension.

The load at any time was determined by measuring the strain imposed on a calibrated transducer, attached to the tensile grips for tension or resting on the compression plate for compression. The compression transducers consisted of high strength stainless steel cylin- ders of different cross-sectional areas, and served as indicators of load at different levels. Four foil SR-4 epoxy-backed electrical strain gages were bonded to each transducer. An epoxy adhesive was used as the bonding agent following directions of the strain gage manufacturer. Etched copper terminals on a teflon base were bonded adjacent to each gage. The gage terminals and plastic-insulated copper wire leads were soldered to the copper terminals. In this manner, when the transducers were handled, no force was transmitted through the copper wires to the gage. The gages were fixed to the transducer in such a way that maximum sensitivity was obtained. Two of the gages were bonded opposite to each other and parallel to the direction of load, and the other two were also bonded opposite to each other but perpendicular to the direction of load. Bonded in this manner, only pure axial ,loads were measured because bending effects cancelled out. The bridge output was increased by about 25 percent, and complete temperature compensation was ob- tained without the use of an unstrained dummy gage [PE~Y, LISSNER 1955]. The tensile transducers were made of high strength aluminum alloy in the shape of small I-sections with different cross-sectional areas. The type and placement

stainless steel rod. It was 9~in.

not threaded, but machined in such a way that a key

Stress Relaxation of Wood at Several Levels of Strain

53

of gages used in the compression transducers were repeated in the tensile trans- ducers, together with the bonding procedure. The gages in all transducers were covered with cerese wax to protect and moisture-proof them. Both types of trans-

wax to protect and moisture-proof them. Both types of trans- Fig. I. Stress Relaxation apparatus as

Fig. I. Stress Relaxation apparatus

as set up for testing in tension.

dueers were checked for "drift" in the loaded and unloaded condition. No tests were carried out until it was ascertained that the gages did not exhibit any significant "drift" in either the loaded or unloaded condition. Also a 24-hottr creep test was performed on the stainless steel and aluminum alloy to see if the material exhibited any creep. From these tests, it was concluded not to stress the stainless steel above 8000 p.s.i, or the aluminum alloy above 2500 p.s.i, and thus avoid any creep effect in the metal. There were two main reasons for using transducers of different cross-sectional

areas rather than a single one. One reason

as previously explained. It was desirable however in relaxation tests at any strain level, that the transducer used should be as sensitive as possible to any load change. In other words, for a given change of load, the change in strain in the transducer

should be as large as possible. This last requirement could be met by having a

was to avoid creep effects in the metal,

54

RAMON ECHENIQUE-~CiANRIQUE

small cross-sectional area in the transducer. However, a limiting area was reached when the criteria used to avoid creep effects in the metal were taken into account. Thus, for compression, six transducers were needed while, for tension, five were required.

Testing Methods

For each species, five specimens in tension and an equal number

in compression

were tested statically to failure in a universal testing machine. The standard

speeds of testing as designated in ASTM Standard 143-52 were used. Since for compression the specimen used was smaller than the standard one, the speed of

Table 1. Static

Strength Properties o~ Individual

Species in Compression and TensionI

 

Species

Oven-dry

Moisture

 

specific

content

gravity

Yo

Kaneelhart

 

(L icaria

cayennensis)

.989

9.67

Sapupira

 

(Diplotropis

purpurea)

.833

9.80

Timbauba

 

(Enterolobium

schomburkgii)

.950

11.28

Nargusta

 

(

Terminalia

amazonia)

.809

10.95

Cedro Granadino

 

(Cedrela

tonduzii)

.415

11.97

Simaruba

 

(Simaruba

amara)

.408

10.46

Kaneelhal~

 

(Licaria

cayennensis)

1.018

10.28

Timbauba

 

(Enterolobium

schomburgkii)

.963

11.26

Nargusta

 

(

Terminalia

amazonia)

.797

10.80

Cedro Granadino

 

(Cedrela

tonduzii)

.400

12.03

Simaruba

 

(Simaruba

a~tar~)

.451

10.27

Maximum

Maximum

P.L.

P.L.

Yollng's

stress

[

strain

stress

strain

modulus

p. s.i.

~in./in.

p.

s. i.

~in./in.

p. s. i. • 10a

Compression parallel to grain

15

690

8

525

13

395

3

745

3

560

13

325

4

925

12

255

3

810

3

220

12

945

5

970

8

890

2

520

3

530

9

625

6

170

8

315

3

440

2

420

5

000

5

260

4

340

3

365

1

290

4

640

4

800

3

605

2

975

1 210

Tension parallel to grain

 

33

275

9

280

28

895

7

800

3

700

38

995

10

995

29

700

8

275

3

630

25

415

10

340

21

840

8

480

2

570

10

050

8

760

8

885

7

555

1

170

11

400

10

085

9

945

8

445

i

170

1 Values shown are averages based on 5 test specimens.

Stress Relaxation of Wood at Several Levels of Strain

55

testing was found according to the relationship N = ZL [WANGAARD 1950] where

N

is the speed of the movable head of the machine in inches per minute; Z =0.003

is

the standard rate of fiber strain in compression parallel to the grain, in./in, per

minute; L = length of the compression specimen. In the case of the compression tests, the ends of the specimen were dried prior to testing in order to avoid "brooming". From the results of these tests, the wood properties shown in Table 1 were calculated. The calibration of the transducers consisted of loading them in the same machine at a uniform rate to a predetermined load level and recording the strain at

specified load intervals to obtain a plot of load versus strain for each transducer. Similar specimens to those used in static testing were used for the relaxation tests, usually two at each of six strain levels. All relaxation tests were conducted

in a room kept at 75 ~F and 65 percent relative humidity which gave an equilibrium

moisture content of 12 percent. The testing procedure was in essence as follows:

Each relaxation specimen was first loaded statically to one-third of its proportional

limit for compression or to one-fourth of its proportional limit in tension. Propor. tional limits had been determined previously from the static tests performed on the five specimells for a particular species. In this manner a load-deformation diagram was obtained for eaeh specimen. A BALDW:[N Model M portable strain indicator was used to read the strain in the specimen. The specimen was returned

to the constant temperature and humidity room for at least 24 hours before the

relaxation test was performed. The specimen was then placed in the experimental apparatus together with the proper transducer. The transducer was then connected to a BALDWIN-I~I~A- HAMILTON Model 120 portable digital strain indicator. The test specimen gages and the temperature compensating dummy were connected to the same BALDWIN Model M portable strain indicator used in the static tests. Small load increments were applied to the specimen and the corresponding strains were recorded. These strains were then compared to the ones obtained in static loading using the load- deformation diagram previously obtained. The operation was repeated when

necessary to assure close agreement between the strains obtained in static loading and those obtained in the relaxation apparatus. Following this, all but a few pounds of load were removed and the relaxation test was ready to start. The load was then applied as quickly as possible (approximately one minute was required) until the desired level of strain in the specimen was reached. The strain was then held constant manually for a period of eight hours while the load relaxation was observed and recorded from the transducer output. The load was recorded at 2,

4, 6, 8, 10, 15, and 30 minutes, and then every 30 minutes until 8 hours had elapsed.

The data for sapupira in tension are not presented here. This species is charac- terized by natural interlocked grain, and the slope of the grain at the small cross-sectional area of the standard tension specimen varied considerably. It is thought that this slope variation was responsible for the erratic data. As mentioned above, approximately one minute was required to impose the desired strain in the specimen. Some relaxation, of course, took place during this load application period and must be taken into account. This was done by extra- polating the measured relaxation observed during the first two minutes following completion of loading backward on the time scale to one-half of the time required

56

I~AM0N ECHENIQuE-M&NRIQUE

for loading. This manipulation is based on the assumption that the rate of relaxa- tion in the very early stages of the test is sufficiently constant to permit linear extrapolation. In effect, the starting point of the measured relaxation is shifted to the mid-point of the loading period. This adjustment was never more than one percent and in the great majority of eases it was only about 89percent.

Analysis

ol Results

The relaxation data at all time intervals were converted to retention of stress, that is, the ratio of stress at time t to the stress at the start of the test (0 rain). Following this, the ratios at thirteen time intervals for each of the specimens tested were plotted. Retention of stress was considered to be the dependent and strain to be the independent variable. Thus, for each species tested in tension and compression, a plot was obtained at each of the following times : 1, 4, 6, 10, 15, 30, 60, 120, 210, 300, 360, 420, and 480 minutes. A carve was fitted by eye in each case. The data obtained from these curves are condensed in Table 2. The rate of shear strain of a Newtonian viscous fluid is given by de/dt = (1/~)F where Uis the Newtonian viscosity of the liquid and F is the stress [A~F~EY 1948]. The rate of shear strain for a non-Newtonian viscous flow is de/dr = Ksinh~F where K and ~ are viscosity constants and F is the stress [HALSEY, WroTE,

of•

/i6

Fig. 2. Mechanical model used in the deriva-

tion of Eqs.

(3) and (10).

F

EYI~II~G 1945 ; TOBOLSKY,

for the Newtonian fluid is a linear function of stress while that for non-Newtonian

follows the hyperbolic sine law. The following differential equation was obtained by use of the mechanical model shown in Fig. 2 and NEWTON'S law of viscous flow:

EYRING

1943]. It can be noted that the rate of strain

 

de

1

d/2

+

1

where

d~-

k2

dt

%-22/e

de

-- = rate of strain,

dt k2 = ttookean constant of spring in series with dashpot, [2 = stress on spring in series with dashpot, U2 = Newtonian constant of dashpot.

(1)

Since in the becomes

case of relaxation

the

1

k2

d/2

dt

rate

of deformation

1

U~

l~-

is

zero,

equation

1

(2)

Stress I~elaxation of Wood at Several Levels of Strain

57

Certain assumptions

are made when using such a model for stress relaxation.

One is that the strain in both branches of the model is the same and remains so for the duration of the test (e1 = %). At any time the sum of the stress in branch one and two equals ~he total stress imposed on the system (F = fl + [3)- However, the stress on the isolated spring remains constant at all times while the one on the branch with the spring and dashpot decays with time. The latter stress will eventually decay to zero if enough time elapses. Before Eq. (2) was solved the stresses and time terms appearing in it were transformed to dimensionless components by the use of the following expressions

which are analogous to the ones used by HALSEY, WHITE and EYI~ING [1945].

 

lO

/2 =

F

--

[10

/10red =

FO0

 

F

t

Fre d --

Fo

tred-

tx

where

F = total stress in the system at time t minutes, ]10 = constant stress in the isolated spring.

All symbols with the subscript "red" are dimensionless. The time tz is the time at which approximately half of the total relaxation has taken place. The cor- responding dimensionless stress (Fred) at this time was designated Fredx.

The

solution of Eq. (2) is the following one:

In(Fred-- /10red) = tredln(Freax-- /10red) + (1 -- tred) ln(1 -- /10red) (3)

The calculations necessary to obtain the values of Fred were done with the aid of an IBM 7094 computer limiting the calculation to data in which it was apparent that the so-called non-recoverable flow component was not present. Figs. 3a and 3b show typical curves obtained by the use of Eq. (3). When the theory of non-linear viscous flow is used, the counter-part of Eq. (1) is

 

de

1

d/~

where

dt

--

k~

dt+

Ksinh~/2

de

= rate of strain,

-- dt /2 = stress on braneh including the dashpot, k2 = Hookean constant of spring in series with dashpot, K and cr = non-Newtonian viscosity constants.

In

solving the

made [HALSEY, WroTE,

above

differential equations, ]~YRIING 1945].

certain

substitutions

T

dv

=

--

Kcclc~t

 

--

K

c~k 2

dt

d~

:

--

Kdt

 

dr

1

d/~

dT

Kk 2

dt

de

 

=

sinh r

 

d~

de

--

dT

sinh ~b

r

de

d/2

de

=

0r

~dl~

were

(4)

first

(5)

(6)

Table 2. Retention o/Stress at Di//erent Levels o/

Time

Strain in compression vim/in.

 

rain.

ooo

T

1 oo

I

ooo

I

[

ooo

I

a oo

I

ooo

I

ooo

I

 

Kaneelhart

 

0

1.000

1.000

1.000

1.000

1.000

1.000

1.000

10

.992

.988

.983

.978

.969

.950

.922

30

.988

.983

.978

.973

.963

.938

.889

60

.988

.981

.975

.969

.957

.928

.884

210

.986

.976

.968

.958

.944

.908

.838

360

.982

.973

.964

.955

.939

.901

.818

420

.981

.972

.964

.955

.938

.898

.808

480

.981

.972

.964

.955

.936

.897

.801

 

Sapupira

 

0

1.000

1.000

1.000

1.000

1.OOO

1.000

1.000

1.000

1.000

10

.989

.984

.978

.974

.968

.950

.918

.833

.782

30

.985

.978

.972

.966

.960

--

60

.983

.976

.968

.961

.953

.930

.896

.793

.726

210

.980

.970

.961

.952

.944

.912

.870

.760

.694

360

.980

.970

.960

.950

.940

.903

.857

.748

.678

420

.980

.970

.960

.950

.939

.901

.853

.744

.677

480

.980

.970

.960

.950

.939

.898

.851

.736

.672

 

J

 

Timbauba

 

0

1.000

1.000

1.000

1.000

1.000

1.000

1.000

1.000

10

.990

.984

.979

.972

.9421

--

.848

.729

.662

30

.986

.980

.974

.964

.922

--

.813

.702

.644

60

.984

.976

.968

.958

.918

--

.802

.680

.620

210

.980

.970

.961

.948

.901

--

.781

.647

.578

360

.980

.968

.956

.938

.885

--

.761

.620

.546

420

.980

.968

.956

.938

.884

--

.757

.618

.537

480

.980

.968

.956

.938

.881

--

.748

.612

.534

 

Nargusta

 

0

1.000

1.000

1.000

1.000

1.000

1.000

1.000

1.000

10

.991

.989

.987

.984

.982

.946

.895

.768

30

.990

.987

.984

.980

.977

.925

.868

.732

60

.988

.985

.982

.978

.974

--

210

.986

.981

.976

.970

.965

.904

.829

.676

360

.986

.979

.973

.966

.960

.892

.822

.660

420

.986

.979

.972

.965

.958

.890

.820

.657

480

.986

.979

.972

.965

.958

.889

.818

.654

m

 

Cedro Granadino

 

0

1.000

1.000

1.000

1.000

1.000

1.000

1.000

10

.988

.980

.972

.964

.950

.878

30

.984

.975

.966

.958

.944

.851

60

.980

.972

.964

.955

.938

.848

210

.980

.968

.958

.946

.924

.811

u

360

.980

.967

.955

.942

.914

.791

420

.980

.967

.954

.942

.906

.786

480

.980

.967

.954

.942

.904

.780

 

Simaruba

 

0

1.000

1.000

1.000

1.000

1.000

1.000

1.000

10

.979

.974

.970

.964

.953

.928

.862

M

30

.976

.968

.962

.954

.936

.908

.845

m

60

.972

.964

.956

.948

.928

.894

.824

210

.972

.959

.946

.934

.910

.866

.788

360

.972

.958

.944

.930

.898

.851

.771

420

.972

.958

.944

.930

.895

.846

.767

m

480

.972

.958

.944

.930

.894

.842

.762

Strain level 2700 ~in.~n.

Strain ]rom Curves Fitted to Experimental

Data

15o0

I

ooo

I

3000

I

Strain in tension ~in./in.

I

ooo

I

ooo

[

ooo

8ooo

1.000

1.000

.993

.992

.989

.988

.987

.985

.982

.980

.982

.979

.982

.979

.982

.978

1.000

1.000

.985

.984

.980

.978

.977

.975

.972

.970

.971

.968

.971

.968

.971

.968

1.000

1.000

.993

.992

.991

.989

.989

.987

.986

.984

.986

.984

.986

.984

.986

.984

1.000

.990

.984

.981

.972

.971

.971

.971

Kaneelhart

1.000

m

1.000

--

1.000

1.000

.990

.988

--

.983

.978

.986

m

.983

--

.977

.970

.982

.979

--

.973

.967

.977

.973

--

.964

.954

.973

.967

--

.954

.941

.972

.966

--

.952

.938

.971

.964

--

.950

.934

Sapupira

 

No data shown

 
 

Timbauba

1.000

--

1.000

--

1.000

1.000

.981

--

.978

--

.971

.962

.975

--

.971

--

.963

.950

.972

--

.968

--

.959

.941

.963

--

.956

--

.940

.922

.962

--

.954

--

.935

.915

.961

--

.952

--

.934

.914

.960

--

.952

--

.934

.914

 

Nargusta

1.000

--

1.000

1.000

1.000

~

.988

--

.986

.979

.975

.985

--

.982

.975

.969

.983

--

.979

.971

.964

.978

--

.973

.963

.955

.978

--

.972

.960

.950

.977

--

.972

.959

.949

.977

--

.970

.958

.947

Cedro Granadino

 

1.000

1.000

1.000

1.000

1.0002

.987

.985

.983

.975

.966

.980

.978

.976

.966

.954

.976

.974

.971

.959

.948

.967

.964

.961

.947

.933

.963

.959

.955

.938

.922

.962

.958

.953

.934

.918

.961

.958

.952

9.32

.916

 

Simaruba

1.000

1.000

1.000

1.000

1.000

.981

.981

.980

.978

.975

.976

.974

.973

.970

.967

.973

.972

.972

.969

.966

.968

.964

.961

.954

.948

.964

.961

.958

.951

.944

.962

.959

.956

.950

.943

.961

.958

.954

.948

.942

Strain level 7500 ~in./in.

 

Time

I

9000

rain.

--

0

 

10

30

60

210

360

420

480

0

10

30

60

210

360

420

480

 

1.000

0

.950

10

.934

30

.923

60

.904

210

.896

360

.896

420

.894

480

1.000

0

.970

10

.963

30

.956

60

.945

210

.938

360

.935

420

.932

480

 

0

10

30

60

210

360

420

480

0

10

30

60

210

360

420

480

60

RA~ON ECHENIQUE-IVfANRIQUE

Integrating each side we obtain:

ln [tanh @-]

=

-- K~lc2t -~- C.

(7)

The same expressions used for Eq. (2) plus the following ones were needed to transform the terms in Eq. (7) to dimensionless quantities:

(8)

Thus, Eq. (7) was transformed to the following:

ar+a = CCFo

b ~- -- (Kccl%tx).

In [tanh (~A

(Fred- /10r~a))] :

btr~d +

C.

(9)

The following conditions are to evaluate the constant C:

when

tred= 0, Fred~ 1

when

tr~a= 1, Fred= Fredx

Finally one has

b =

tanh(~

In

tanh(~

(Fredx--/10red))

(1--/10red))

tanh [(~-

(Fr~d-- [lor~a))]

r

t

=

[ ared

F

h

ared

1

-

-,1=4

~~[tred]

/

1

[tanh [(~

(] -- ]10red))]] .

(10)

In order to use Eq. (10) the values of [loredand area had to be found. Remember- ing the eharaeteris~ies of the model, it is apparent that the value of ]10redsought is equal to the stress retention at 480 minutes. This statement assumes that relaxa- tion of stress reached an asymptotic vMue within eight hours.

In compression at strain levels where no non-recoverable flow took place, the asymptotic value of stress relaxation was reached well within 480 minutes. How- ever, the asymptotic value in tension was not well defined in all eases. In some, the stress relaxation eurve appeared to have reached an asymptote, although this cannot be said with certainty. In such eases, a value of ]lor~a was estimated by taking the stress retention value at 480 minutes as the asymptotic value. The strain values in tension at whieh this assumption was made are indicated by

footnotes in the tabulated data. The next step was to find area. If in Eq. (10) the corresponding value Fr~a at tr~a= 2 is substituted, then it can be seen that area is the only unkaown. In solving for area and later for F~ea all computations were done with the aid of an IBM 7094 computer limiting the calculations to data in which it was apparent that the so-called non-recoverable flow component was not present. The data obtained are presented in Table 3.

3b show how unsuitable the mechanical model was when New-

tonian theory was used. It is quite evident from these curves that the values

Figs. 3 a and

Stress Relaxation of Wood at Several Levels of Strain

61

obtained by the use of Eq. (3) do not conform very well to the experimental data. In the solution of Eq. (3), experimental stress retention values at about 20 minutes and at 480 minutes were used.

zOO

0.97

0.g6

~\.\

.~ O.g5-'e3 zC~fufl)~a'300D#in./in.

~

C, Cedro ~r~nad~2;o.7000~],n./in~

~ ~29zi.a

_

".SS

_

Fig. 3. Typical curves for relaxation obtained

by

the use of Eq.

(3) (Newtonian)together

with corresponding experimental curves.

a) Compression

b)

Tension.

0g.8

"\~

0.97 From Newtomanmodel

"

"

Nzs ~brgusl~, 750o~in./,'n.

~Jkn~rubo',b'OOLT,u.in,/in.~

0.95- ~6

~_ \

"~ ~56

1

I0

100 rnin~80

h'rne

The fit to the experimental curve could probably be improved while still using Newtonian theory for the description of viscous flow by employing ~ repetition of elements, such as the ones of the mechanical model used in the derivation of Eq. (3). E~m~G~ON and YOV~GS [1964] reported using an expression derived from a model consisting of two units such as that shownin Fig. 2. They concluded that the two-term compliance function described adequately the retarded elastic component of creep in tension and compression perpendicular to the grain of red oak.

similarly found that the recoverable creep behavior of

teak in tension parallel to the grain was well described by an expression with two retarded units, such as the one used by ETH~GTO~ and YOU~GS [1964]. In order to describe the creep at high levels of stress, BHAT~AGAa [1964] added a dashpot to the model in series. However, the viscous flow of this dashpot was not accord- ing to Newtonian theory as the deformation of the dashpot was an exponential function of stress. The mathematical expressions which BHAT~AGAa [1964] ob- tained conformed well to his experimental data at high as well as at low levels of stress. GROSS]gAN and KII~GSTO~ [1954] fitted their experimental relaxation curves of hoop pine with an expression derived from a linear viscoelastic mechanical model consisting of three units like the one shown in Fig. 2. These researchers found that their mathematical expression fitted their experimental data well. I-Iowever, they pointed out that widely different "relaxation times" from the ones they obtained could also have given a good fit.

B~[ATI~AGAI~ [1964]

Table 3. Retention o/ Stress at Different Levels o/ Strain Given by the Non-Newto~tian Model

Time

Strain in compression v in./in.

 

Strain in tension Mn./in.

 

mill, I

1000

1 1500[

 

ooo

I

5oo

t

~7~o

I~ooo

1500

]

2000

I 3000

[

3500

[ 4000

]5000

[

6000

 

Kaneelh~r~

 

Kaneelhart

 
 

1.000

1.00O

1.000

1.000

1.00O

--

1.000

1.000

1.000

--

1.000

--

1.000

10

.994

.988

.984

.977

.977

.993

.992

.990*

.9881

.9861

30

.989

.983

.978

.970

.970

.989

.988

.985

--

.983

.978

60

.987

.980

.974

.966

.965

.987

.985

.982

--

.979

.972

210

.983

.975

.967

.958

.956

.983

.980

.976

--

.972

.961

360

.982

.973

.965

.956

.953

.982

.979

.973

--

.969

.957

420

.982

.973

.965

.956

.952

.982

.979

.973

--

.969

.956

480

.982

.973

.964

.955

.952

.982

.979

.972

--

.968

,

.955

 

Sapupira

 

Sapupira

 

0

1.ooo

11.ooo

 

1.ooo

11.OOOl

-

1.ooo

10

.989

]

.984

.978

[

.973

]

--

.968

30

.985

,979

.972

]

.966

I

--

.959

60

.982

.976

.968

]

.961

[

--

.953

No ealculations made

 

210

.980

.971

.962/.953

/

--

,944

360

.980

.970

.961

[

.951

[

--

.941

420

.980

.970

.960[

.9501

-

.940

480

.980

.970

.960[

.950]

--

.940

 

Timbauba

 

Timbauba

 

0

1.000

1.000

1.000

11.000~11.0008

 

1.000

1.000

1.000

I

--

]1.000

 

1.000

i0

.989

.984

.979

[

.976

[

.975

.985

.984

.982

I

--

[

.979

.973

3O

.986

.980

.972

[

.968

]

.965

.980

.979

.975

I

-

[

.971

.962

60

.984

.976

.968

[

.963

I

.958

.976

.975

.9711

--

[

.966

.954

210

.981

.971

.961

[

.955

[

.946

.972

.970

.964

t

--

I

.956

.942

360

.980

.970

.9591.9521.942

 

.971

.968

.962

I

-

t.953

 

.937

420

.980

.969

.9581.9511.941

.971

.968

.9611

-

1.952

.936

48O

.980

.969

.958

[

.951

[

.941

.971

.968

.961

]

--

l

.952

.935

 

Nargusta

 

~Targusta

 

0

1.ooo

i.ooo

i.oo0

ll.oool

 

-

1.ooo

t.ooo

t.ooo

1.ooo I

-

Itooo

 

1.ooo:

10

.992

.990

.9881.986

I

--

.984

.993

.992

.989

I

--

I

,986

.981

 

i

3O

.989

.986

.983

[

.980

[

--

.976

.991

.989

.985[

--

[

.981

.974

6O

.988

:984

.9801

.976

I

--

.972

.989

.987

.983

/

--

I

.978

.969

210

.986

.981

.9751

.969

I

--

.964

.987

.984

.979]

--

I

.973

.961

 

i

360

.986

.980

.974[

.967

[

--

.961

.986

.984

.977 /

-

1.971

 

.958

420

.986

.979

.973[.966

/

--

.960

.986

.984

.977

/

--

]

.971

.958

48O

.986

.979

.973

I

.966

I

--

.960

.986

.984

.977}

--

1.971

 

.957

 

Cedro Granadino

 

Cedro Granadino

 

0

1,ooo

2.000

I,.ooo

 

1.ooo 11.ooo

 

--

1.000

1.000

1.000

1.0001

1.0001

10

.988

.981[.974

.968].964

 

.990

.988

.987

.987

.975

30

.984

.974l

.968

.959l

.955

.984

.980

.979

.977

.964

6O

,981

.970

,964

.954

.949

.980

.975

.974

.971

.956

210

,980

.967[.957

 

.945[.940

 

.974

.966

.964

.958

.942

360

.980

.967

I

.955

.943

/

.937

.972

.963

.960

.953

.937

420

.980

.967

.955

.943

~

.937

.972

.963

960

.952

.935

480

.980

.967

.955

.942

I

.937!

.971

.962

.959

.951

.934

 

Simaruba

 

~imaruba

 

0

1.000

1.ooo 11.ooo

 

1.ooo

I

-

--

1.000

1.000

1.000

1.000

1.000

10

.980

.975

.970

.963

--

--

.983

.981

.981

.979

.978

30

.974

.969

.961

.952

--

m

--

.976

.974

.974

.970

.967

60

.972

.965

.955

.944}

--

--

.972

.970

.969

.964

.960

210

.972

.959

.947

.933

--

--

.965

.962

.960

.954

.948

360

.972

.958

.944

.931

--

--

.963

.960

.957

.951

.944

420

.972

.958

.944

.930

--

--

.962

.959

.956

.950

.943

480

.972

.958

.944

.930

--

--

.962

.958

.955

.949

.942

Calculations based on the assumption that/10red was equal to stress retention at 480 rain.

Strain level 2250 ~in./in.

a StrMn level 2700 ~in./im

Stress Relaxation of Wood at Several Levels of Strain

63

Figs. 4a and 4b present typical experimental curves together with their corresponding prediction curves as given by the use of Eq. (10) based on non- l~ewtouian theory of viscous flow. It can be seen that the curves obtained with the aid of the mechanical model of Fig. 2 fit the experimental data quite well, both in compression and tension, at various levels of strain within the range of strain where no non-recoverable flow occurs.

Fig. 4. Typical curves for relaxation obtaine4

to-

gether with corresponding experimenf~al curves a) Compression b) Tension.

by

the

use

os

Eq. (10)

(non-Newtonian)

ZOO

0.g9

0.90~

O.g7

0.96

O.96

zoo

e~ o.99

0.98

0.97

0.98

\\

flsSapupL~a,sooo~in./in.

C1 Cedro Gramzd/no,looo~in./in.

--

----Exper/m[enfal

Fromnon-New~on~anmo~e"~

I

"\\

~'~

g.,~

0.95

N1.5 Nclrgusfct, 1500#in./in.

 

-~G

Sl'morubo,

BOOOp.in./in.

--

"

"

0.9~t

 

1

70

100

rnin

~5'0

T/me

The curve for simaruba in tension at the 6000 ~in./in. strain level departs from the experimental curve somewhat, but this particular ease is one in which a definite asymptotic value of stress retention was not reached during the 480 mi- nutes that the test was conducted. As stated before, in cases like this the stress retention value at 480 minutes was assumed to be the value of/10red in Eq. (10). The faultiness of this assumption may explain the discrepancy between the theo- retical and experimental curves. It is quite noticeable that non-Newtouian theory fitted the data much better than Newtonian theory when applied to this model containing a single dashpot. This finding is in agreement with the contention presented before, that by intro- ducing a non-linear dashpot into a mechanical model, it will tend to exhibit the effect given by several Newtonian dashpots of different characteristics. Also the fact that, in this study, stress retention was not a linear function of stress might be a factor in explaining why the non-Newtonian model conformed to the data better than the Newtonian one. Figs. 5 a and 5 b show stress retention values plotted against strain level for cedro granadino in compression and kanee]hart in tension. The plottings of stress retention values against strain for the other species were quite similar to those

6~

RAMON ECH]~N]QUE-MANRIQU]~

shown in Figs. 5a and 5b. The line shown corresponds to the stress retention values at 480 minutes given by the non-Newtonian model. A straight line was also fitted to the data inthat strain-level range whereno non-recoverable flow was present. The negative slope of the line was found to be significant at the 5 percent level for all species in compression and for all species except simaruba in tension. The significance of the slope means that the species tested, under the conditions

zOO

i

I O.99

090 Cedro ~ramad/'mo--

O.96

o9,!

.~

-~. o.92

~o.go

0.88

O86

O.8Oo

7000

zooo

o

o

o

o

-~ 0.97

0 96

~

b

3ooo~in./fn.~ooa ae~o

,5'trazblevel

Konee/harl

\ \ o\ \

Zooo

,aoo

6000,u.in./in8000.

Fig. 5.

Stress

retention at 8 hours for individual specimens of a) Cedro

granadio

in

compression and

The

b) Kuneelhart in tension. solid lines represent stress retention us given by the non-Newtoniun model.

described previously, exhibit non-linear behavior in their stress relaxation characteristics. This result is not in agreement with the conclusion of other investigators who have stated that wood behaves approximately linearly. But, as will be pointed out next, the data of several researchers also show a trend toward non-linearity. GROSS~AI~ and KII~GS~O~ [1954, 1963] have conducted the most critical tests on whether wood behaves as a linear viscoelastic material. Hoop pine (Araucariacunninghamii) beams were tested in the green condition and at 12 and 7 percent moisture content. The means of the normalized relaxation modulus and creep compliance were computed for various times. The product of the relaxation modulus and creep compliance was then evaluated. GROSS~AN and KINGSTO~ explained that the product of creep compliance and relaxation modulus cannot exceed unity for a linear viscoelastic material. From their results, it is evident that in the case of the green beams, the product did rise significantly above unity. However, the product function departure from unity was not statistically signi- ficant for those beams tested at 7 percent moisture content. They concluded that under the conditions at which they tested, the behavior of wood follows closely that of a linear viscoelastic material, even though at high moisture contents in bending the limits of linear behavior appeared to be lower, and superposition was no longer strictly applicable even at stresses less than half the ultimate stress.

Stress l%elaxatiortof Wood at Several Levels of Strain

65

KI~GSTO~ and CLAI~KE [1961b] show a figure of creep compliance against stress level as percent of ultimate stress for three species. Although creep compli- ance seems to be dependent on stress even at the low levels, they fitted the points with a line showing creep compliance to be constant at low levels of strain. KI~'G- ST0~ and CLARKE must have felt that the trend of creep compliance increasing with stress level was not significant, and they chose to interpret their data in the manner described above. KInG [1961] performed tensile creep tests on eleven species of wood at room temperature and 12 percent moisture content for about 30 minutes. From his experimental results, he concluded that tensile creep of wood is a linear function of stress up to the threshold of set. However, it is the opinion of the writer, that KING's experimental data below the threshold of set could also be fitted by a

non-linear relationship. There is a trend present in the data which could warrant the use of a curvilinear rather than a linear relationship between creep index and stress level. It is evident that at low levels of stress or strain, the fractional creep or percent stress relaxation that takes place is not very large, say up to a maximum of 10 percent [GaosS)~A~, KII~GSTON 1954]. In the same range, where no non-recover- able flow component is present, all species tested ha the present study exhibited

a

spread of stress relaxation from 2 to about 6 percent.

It is interesting to note from Figs. 5 a and 5b that in compression a strain level

is

reached above which the stress retention values diminish quite markedly. This

change occurs at strain levels between 2500 and 3000 ~in./in. On the other hand, in tension the change in rate of stress retention is not very well defined, and it appears to take place at strain levels close to failure. The reports of KI~GS:ro~ [1962], BHA:r?qAGA~ [1964], FUJITA and NAKATO [1965], and CSIRO [1964] point out that tensile creep exhibits a gradual increase with increasing stress level, and that there is no sudden change, at least not of

the magnitude found in compression tests. In the case of creep in compression,

marked

increase in creep at stress levels upward from about 60 percent of ultimate.

Similar results were found for stress relaxation in tension and compression in the present study. This confirms the fact that the time-dependent effects are much larger in compression than in tension, especially at high levels of stress or strain. The sudden change could logically be attributed to the occurrence of non- recoverable flow. However, KI~GSTON and CLA]gKE[1961b] also found a sudden rise in recoverable bending creep compliance at about half the ultimate stress pointing out the fact that non-recoverable flow is not the only cause for the sudden change in fractional creep when a critical stress level is reached. Figs. 6 and 7 present the reduction of stress retention values with time at a number of different strain levels for two species tested in tension and compression. The broken lines are the experimental lines, while the solid lines were obtained by the use of Eq. (10) (non-Newtonian). The stress retention values tend to decrease as strain level increases and the amount of decrease tends to get larger as the strain levels reach higher values.

This last statement

agreement with past studies of stress relaxation [G~0Ss~A~

KINGSTON [1962], MINA~I [1953b], and CSII~O [t962] reported

a very

is true

both in compression and tension

and is in general 1954; GROSS~[A~,

66

RA1KONECI{ENIQUE-~C[ANRIQUE

KINGSTON 1954; KINGSTON, CLARKE 1961a; KITAZAWA 1947 ; M~A~ 1953 a; YOUNGS 1957]. It is worthwhile to point out that had wood acted like a linear material, the curves drawa~ as solid lines in Figs. 6 and 7 would have been consolidated into single one. This sole curve would then depict the stress relaxation behavior over a range of low levels of strain.

o

8,o

1s

z4o

T/me

220

~tOOrnin480

Fig. 6. Compressive stress retention as aluneticn of time at different levels for tWO species,

zl

80

760

Z40

l)me

320

~09 rain 4~20

Fig. 7- Tensile S~l'eSs retention as a function of time at different straiu levels for two species.