Effects of Different Loading Methods on the Results of Wood Mechanical Tests
- Issue 1, Pages: 12-18(1989)
DOI: 10.19455/j.mcgy.1989.01.003
扫 描 看 全 文

1. Research Institute of Wood Industry, Chinese Academy of Forestry
扫 描 看 全 文
[1]张寿槐,张文庆,臧丽华.木材力学试验的加荷速度及其方法对试验结果的影响[J].木材工业,1989(01):12-18.
Zhang Souhuai Zhang Wenqing Zhang Lihua. Effects of Different Loading Methods on the Results of Wood Mechanical Tests. [J]. China Wood Industry (1):12-18(1989)
为修订GB1927—1943—80《木材物理力学试验方法》采用红松等七种木材,按我国标准规定每分钟施加一定荷载和ISO(国际标准)规定的试样在一定时间达到破坏的两种方法进行了比较试验。结果经方差分析证明,我国现行标准与ISO规定的加荷速度相比,顺纹抗压强度、抗弯强度、顺纹抗拉强度、横纹全部抗压比例极限的试验结果差异不明显,可认为两种试验方法所得结果相同;抗弯弹性模量差异较大,按国际标准的试验结果高于国家标准达20.5—28.8%。木材顺纹抗压强度除用上述二种加荷方法外,并增加每分钟压头移动一定距离的加荷方法进行试验,结果表明:只要试样在2分钟以内破坏,上述三种方法的结果差异并不显著。
In order to make comparison between different loading methods (according to Chinese GB and ISO), Timbers of Korean pine and six other species were chosen. The results shown that there is no significant difference in the tests of tensile and compression strength parallel to grain, bending strength, and stress at proportional limit in compression perpendicular to grain, but the MOE values of ISO method are 20.5-28.8% higher than that of Chinese GB.In addition to the above methods, another method was involved in the tests of compression strength parallel to grain with loading speed at a constant distance of the crosshead movement per unit time. No significant difference was shown, provided that wood failure occured within 2 minutes.
相关文章
相关作者
相关机构
京公网安备11010802024621