NDT to identify biological damage in wood

Nondestructive techniques are widely used to assess existing timber structures. The models proposed for these methods are usually performed in the laboratory using small clear wood specimens. But in real situations many anomalies, defects and biological damage are found in wood. In these cases the existing models only indicate that the values are outside normality without providing any other information. To solve this problem, a study of non-destructive probing methods for wood was performed, testing the behaviour of four different techniques (penetration resistance, pullout resistance, drill resistance and chip drill extraction) on wood samples with different biological damage, simulating an in-situ test. The wood samples were obtained from existing Spanish timber structures with biotic damage caused by borer insects, termites, brown rot and white rot. The study concludes that all of the methods offer more or less detailed information about the degree of deterioration of wood, but that the first two methods (penetration and pullout resistance) cannot distinguish between pathologies. On the other hand, drill resistance and chip drill extraction make it possible to differentiate pathologies and even to identify species or damage location. Finally, the techniques used were compared to characterize their advantages and disadvantages

The influence of sensor placement on in-situ ultrasound wave velocity measurement.

Ultrasound wave velocity was measured in 30 pieces of Spanish Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.), 90 x 140 mm in cross-section and 4 m long. Five different sensor placement arrangements were used: end to end (V0), face to opposite face, edge to opposite edge, face to same face and edge to same edge. The pieces were successively shortened to 3, 2 and 1 m, in order to obtain these velocities and their ratios to reference value V0 for different lengths and angles with respect to the piece axis for the crossed measurements. The velocity obtained in crossed measurements is lower than V0. A correction coefficient for crossed velocities is proposed, depending on the angle, to adjust them to the V0 benchmark. The velocities measured on a surface, are also lower than V0, and their ratio with respect to V0 is close to 0.97 for distances equal to or greater than 18 times the depth of the beam

Cardiovascular Efficacy and Safety of Bococizumab in High-Risk Patients

BACKGROUN