Mobile Edition
Print
Get the Mag
Weekly Updates2. Sawing the 2 by 4's slightly over size, and kiln-drying with a top load of 150 to 200 pounds per [ft.sup.2] would likely have improved the yield of dimension lumber.
3. The flexural properties of this lumber met or exceeded the allowable properties assigned to the species grouping containing ponderosa pine (Western Woods).
4. While about 7 percent of the 2 by 4's could qualify as 1450Fb-1.3E MRS lumber, such production is not recommended. This is the lowest grade of MSR lumber currently sold in any volume, and no market is currently established for this species group. For those already producing structural lumber grading, Light Framing, or Structural Light Framing grades are better alternatives.
5. If a market is readily available, this lumber is suitable for the production of stock for glulam beams. However, careful attention must be paid to the reduction of warp and wane.
6. Appearance grades offer the highest value alternative for lumber production from this suppressed-growth resource. A premium of about $53 per 1000 cubic feet (gross log scale) was estimated in a previous study.
Literature Cited
AITC. 1993. Standard specifications for structural glued-laminated timber of softwood species. Standard 117-9, Manufacturing. American Inst. of Timber Construction, Englewood, Colorado.
ASTM. 2005. Annual Book of Standards, Volume 04.10. West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania: American Soc. for Testing and Materials. D 198-05. Standard methods of static tests of lumber in structural sizes. D 1990-00. Standard practices for establishing allowable properties from in-grade tests of full-size specimens. D 2395-02. Standard test methods for specific gravity of wood and wood-based materials. D 4442-92. Standard test methods for direct moisture content measurement of wood and wood-based materials.
Burns, R.M. and B.H. Honkala. 1990. In: Silvics of North America. Vol. 1. Conifers. Agri. Handbook No. 654. Washington, D.C.: USDA Forest Serv. Pinus ponderosa. W.W. Oliver and R.A. Ryker. pp. 413-424 Summary of tree characteristics. Burns and Honkala. pp. 646-649
Cisternas, A.G. 2000. Mechanical properties of ponderosa pine dimension lumber from small-diameter, overstocked stands in Arizona. Master's thesis. Dept. of Forest Products, Univ. of Idaho, Moscow, Idaho.
Evans, J.W., J.K. Evans, and D.W. Green. 1989. Computer programs for adjusting the mechanical properties of 2-inch dimension lumber for changes in moisture content. Gen. Tech. Rept. FPL-GTR-63. USDA Forest Serv., Forest Products Lab., Madison, Wisconsin. www1. fpl.fs.fed.us/vicki/interactivemc.html.
Erickson, R.G., T.M. Gorman, D.W. Green, and D. Graham. 2000. Mechanical grading of lumber sawn from small-diameter lodgepole pine, ponderosa pine, and grand fir from northern Idaho. Forest Prod. J. 50(7/ 8):59-65.
Ernst, S. and W.Y. Pong. 1985. Lumber recovery from ponderosa pine in northern California. Res. Pap. PNW-RP-333. USDA Forest Serv., Pacific Northwest Sta., Portland, Oregon.
Fahey, T.D., T.A. Max, and J.K.R. Sachet. 1986. Factors affecting grade change in ponderosa pine lumber in the desert Southwest. Forest Prod. J. 36(6):36-40.
-- and J.K.R. Sachet. 1993. Product recovery of ponderosa pine in Arizona and New Mexico. Res. Pap. PNW-RP-467. USDA Forest Serv., Pacific Northwest Sta., Portland, Oregon.
Fiedler, C.E., C.E. Keegan, and S.F. Arno. 1997. Utilization as a component of restoring ecological processes in ponderosa pine forests. Gen. Tech. Rept. FPL-GTR-100, USDA Forest Serv., Forest Products Lab., Madison, Wisconsin.
FPS. 1997. Machine-Graded Lumber. In: Wood Design Focus: 8(2). Stephen Smulaki, Ed. Madison, Wisconsin, Forest Products Soc.
Galligan, W.L. and K.A. McDonald. 2000. Machine grading: Practical concerns for lumber Producers. Gen. Tech. Rpt. FPL-GTR-7. USDA Forest Serv., Forest Products Lab., Madison, Wisconsin. www.fpl. fs.fed.us/documnts/fplgtr/fplgtr07.pdf
Gorman, T.M. and D.W. Green. 2000. Mechanical grading of lumber sawn from small-diameter Rocky Mountain species, In: Dr. R Gazo, ed. Proc.: Issues related to handling the influx of small-diameter timber in western North America. Proc. No. 7261, Forest Products Soc., Madison, Wisconsin. pp. 29-35.
Green, D.W. and J.W. Evans. 1987. Mechanical properties of visually graded lumber: Vol.1, A summary. Pub. PB-88-159-397. Dept. of Commerce, National Tech. Information Serv., Springfield, Virginia. 76 pp.
--, E.C. Lowell, and R. Hernandez. 2005. Structural lumber from dense stands of small-diameter Douglas-fir trees. Forest Prod. J. 55(7/8):42-50.
Hernandez, R., D.W. Green, D.E. Kretschmann, and S.P. Verrill 2005. Improved utilization of small-diameter ponderosa pine in glued-laminated timber. FPL RP-625. USDA Forest Serv., Forest Products Lab., Madison, Wisconsin. www.fpl.fs.fcd.us/documnts/fplrp/ fpl_rp625.pdf.
James, K. 2001. 2000 MSR lumber production survey. Structural Building Components Magazine. December, 2001. pp. 36-37.
Larson, D. and R. Mirth. 1998. Potential for using small-diameter ponderosa pine: A wood fiber project. Forest Prod. J. 48(6):37-42.
Lowery, D.P. 1984. Ponderosa pine, an American wood. FS-254. USDA Forest Serv., Washington, D.C.
Lowell, E.C., J. Funck, and C. Brunner. 2000. Small diameter trees in the Pacific Northwest. In: Dr. R Gazo, ed. Proc.: Issues related to handling the influx of small-diameter timber in western North America. Proc. No. 7261, Forest Products Soc., Madison, Wisconsin. pp. 15-20.
-- and D.W. Green. 2001. Lumber recovery from small diameter ponderosa pine from Flagstaff, Arizona. In: Vance, Regina: Covington, W. Wallace; Edminster, Carleton B., tech. coordinators. Ponderosa pine ecosystems restoration: Steps toward stewardship. April 25-27, 2000, Flagstaff, Arizona. Proc. RMRS-P22, USDA Forest Serv., Forest Serv., Rocky Mountain Res. Sta., Ogden, Utah. pp. 161-165.
NDS. 2005. Design values for wood construction. Supplement to the National Design Specification. American Forest and Pap. Assoc. Washington, D.C.
Rummer, R., J. Prestemon, D. May, P. Miles, J. Vissage, R. McRoberts, G. Liknes, W. Sheppard, D. Ferguson W. Elliot, S. Miller, S. Reutebunch, J. Barbour, J. Fried, B. Stokes, E. Bilek, and K. Skog. 2003. A strategic assessment of forest biomass and fuel reduction treatments in western states, www.fs.fed.us/research/pdf/Western_final.pdf.
Shuler, C.E., D.D. Markstrom, and M.G. Ryan. 1989. Fibril angle in young-growth ponderosa pine as related to site index, D.B.H., and location in the tree. Res. Note RM-492. USDA Forest Serv., Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Expt. Sta., Fort Collins, Colorado. 4 pp.
Simpson, W.T. and D.W. Green. 2001. Effect of drying methods on warp and grade of 2 by 4s from small-diameter ponderosa pine. FPL-RP-601. USDA Forest Serv., Forest Products Lab., Madison, Wisconsin. www.fpl.fs.fed.us/documnts/fplrp/fplrp601.pdf.
--. 2004. Effect of drying temperature on warp and downgrade of 2 by 4s from small diameter ponderosa pine. FPL-RP-624. USDA Forest Serv., Forest Products Lab., Madison, Wisconsin. www.fpl. fs.fed.us/documnts/fplrp/fpl_rp624.pdf.
Voorhies, G. and W.A. Groman. 1982. Longitudinal shrinkage and occurrence of various fibril angles in juvenile wood of young-growth ponderosa pine. Arizona Forestry Notes No. 16. Univ. of Northern Arizona, Flagstaff, Arizona. 18 pp.
Willits, S.A., E.C. Lowell, and G.A. Christensen. 1997. Lumber and veneer yields from small-diameter trees. Role of wood production in ecosystem management. In: Proc. of the sustainable forestry working group at the IUFRO All Div. 5 Conf Pullman, Washington, July, 1997. Gen. Tech. Rept., FPL-GTR-100. USDA Forest Serv., Forest Products Lab., Madison, Wisconsin.
WWPA. 1998. Standard grading rules for western lumber. Western Wood Products Assoc. Portland, Oregon.
The authors are, respectively, Professor and Dept. Head, Dept. of Forest Products, Univ. of Idaho, Moscow, Idaho (tgorman@uidaho. edu); Supervisory Research Engineer Emeritus, USDA Forest Serv. Forest Products Lab., Madison, Wisconsin (levangreen@hughes. net); Instructor Professor, Dept. of Wood Engineering, Faculty of Forestry, Univ. of Chile, Santiago, Chile (acistern@uchile.cl); Senior Engineer, TECO, Sun Prairie, Wisconsin (roland.hernandez@ tecotested.com); and Research Forest Products Technologist, USDA Forest Serv., Pacific Northwest Research Sta., Portland, Oregon (elowell@fs.fed.us). Funding for this project was provided by USDA Forest Serv., Region 3, and USDA Forest Serv., State and Private Forestry, Technology Marketing Unit, Madison, Wisconsin. We gratefully acknowledge the assistance provided by the Grand Canyon Forests Partnership in obtaining the logs, the Fremont Sawmill of the Collins Companies in sawing and kiln drying, USDA Forest Serv. Region 6 for measurements assistance, and the Western Wood Products Assoc. for lumber grading. The assistance of Ms. Pamela Byrd in completing the statistical analysis of this data is much appreciated. The Forest Products Lab. is maintained in cooperation with the Univ. of Wisconsin. This article was written and prepared by U.S. Government employees on official time, and it is therefore in the public domain and not subject to copyright. The use of trade or firm names in this publication is for reader information and does not imply endorsement by the USDA of any product or service. This paper was received for publication in February 2007. Article No. 10311.
Thomas M. Gorman *
David W. Green *
Aldo G. Cisternas
Roland Hernandez
Eini C. Lowell *
* Forest Products Society Member.
FEED