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
