On 2/22/2012 3:36 PM, dpb wrote:
On 2/22/2012 2:28 PM, Michael Joel wrote:
Swingman wrote:
You don't want to argue because you were mistaken, charitably, either
in your wording, or your understanding.
And you are very mistaken in your contention that you "doubt anyone
knows for sure" ... a first semester, college level, Botany 101 class
would prove to you that this is well understood, and well documented
with empirical evidence.
For your future benefit, and so this ends on an instructive note, you
will certainly want to explore the definitive work on the matter:
http://www.amazon.com/UNDERSTANDING-.../dp/B000UQH160
Every woodworker can learn something from reading Hoadley, guaranteed.
See - that is why I get pulled back in. Because the logic is so illogical.
If I said I don't believe they really know what is happening - you say
take a "first semester, college level, Botany 101 class
would prove" - The only thing it would prove is they believe it. Very
circular thinking (as the "scientists" would say).
...
Well, that's self-serving to the max. You might as well say that the physicists
on believe Newton's Principles; after all, it's "only" a theory.
I suggest you do read Hoadley (or any of several references from the US Forest
Products Lab, these can be downloaded at no cost); specifically Chap 4, "Wood
and Water".
The short story is---wood shrinks as it dries and it does so non-uniformly. The
tangential/radial shrinkage ratio from green to oven-dry has been measured for
some hundreds of species and averages about 2 (roughly an average of 8%/4% T/R)
but shows a significant variation between species of from just barely above 1:1
to highs approaching 3:1. The higher the ratio the more the particular would
will distort as it is dried as the relative shrinkage in the two directions
competes at a different rate.
The difference between tangential and radial shrinkage isn't random nor magic;
it's caused by the anatomical structure, principally the effect of wood rays
whose lengthwise axes are oriented radially outward. Species w/ more
predominant rays are more stable.
Over the range of moisture content shrinkage is roughly proportional to
moisture loss. This doesn't matter too much as raw lumber is dried; the
roughsawn stock is oversize to begin with and if dried uniformly will be stable
after it is milled given a uniform environment. This is why it is so important
to finish both sides of a furniture panel, say--if one side is finished and the
other not, differential moisture absorption is highly likely to cause movement.
Cupping after the fact is owing to one of two causes--either the piece wasn't
at equilibrium to begin with and dried after milling with the resultant change
in dimension as determined by the species' particular T/R ratio and the
percentage change in moisture.
The second is that the piece has subsequently absorbed moisture and therefore
grown. The relative amount in the direction is also dependent on T/R and how
uniform (or un-uniform) the moisture absorption is.
Cupping in flatsawn boards results in concavity away from the pith, the result
of greater tangential than radial shrinkage. The magnitude is greater as the
location of the board from the original trunk is closer to the pith on a
surface. This face is completely radial while the opposite is tangential in the
portion across from the location of the pith and will therefore shrink at twice
the rate. Woodworkers tend to say the "rings flatten out" which an easy way to
remember the direction the board will cup but the reason for the cup has
virtually nothing to do w/ the growth rings themselves.
Cup is reversible on swelling which is why the idea of wetting is given as a
cure. Of course, the end then has to be to get the whole board in equilibrium
again at that point which goes back to point a) above--if the piece was milled
in inequilibrium, it's an insoluble problem w/o mechanical repair.
Wow, nice explanation! Thanks for taking the time to write that up.
--
Any given amount of traffic flow, no matter how
sparse, will expand to fill all available lanes.
To reply, eat the taco.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bbqboyee/