life of a tree revealed in the rings

From what I understand (probably from reading Hasluck's thick compilation), even a single growth ring has a spring part and a winter part. It's difficult to argue with that. Maybe the dispute here has to go with what one calls a "growth ring". I believe I would say that the trunk of a tree has growth rings even if they are invisible to the naked eye. In fact, I would define them in terms of annual seasons.

Bill

Reply to
Bill
Loading thread data ...

...

The dispute here is that I don't believe the claim that a single growth ring can take "decades" to form is based on anything but I'd be most interested to see how that could be if it were indeed, really so.

As noted in all recent literature, the term "annual rings" is considered to be less than accurate owing to its reliance on temperate zone with regular seasons to be so; the tropics of course being the extreme the other direction. I was simply noting that owing to aberrations in normal weather it's possible for there to be the occasional extra or even a missed growth cycle in a given year even in normally very regular seasonal areas and one could postulate severe climatic events that could cause, perhaps, even more than a single year duration of such albeit more and more unlikely as the time frame expands. To think there would be such that lasted for a ten year span is simply expecting too much; or if so, as noted above I'd surely like to see the specimen in which it was found.

Reply to
dpb

Relatively, yes. ;-)

Reply to
krw

ROTFL! The first time I was in Paris, and I was using the commode, not the "B" just to be clear, I flushed the commode, and the room I was in was on the 5th floor, the water literally leapt out through the seat. Not a pleasant experience.

Reply to
OFWW

VBG!

Reply to
OFWW

Remember there are three species of Redwood. You are taking about the Sequoia sempervirens is the coastal 350 feet + tall. The inland are shorter but have massive trunks - drive through and live in... they are the or giant sequoia (Sequoiadendron giganteum) 280 feet + with 26 feet diameter trunks and the new one : Metasequoia glyptostroboides, the dawn redwood the shrimp a mere 200 feet.

All have subspecies and are complex in nature. Most people don't acknowledge that Redwood is Structural wood and a hardwood. San Francisco was rebuilt after the great fire in 1907.

I owned a number of acres of species of sempervirens up to 10 years ago. We lived on the property and tended the trees. They are the biggest weed in the world. Weed you say ? The seeds shower like snow after a rain and the cones are about ripe. The trees force the cones open and shower the area. Now you have trees growing in cracks and anything that sits still. Forget gutters - they get filled. AND NO I DIDN'T CUT THEM DOWN. I could have retired there If I cut one every few years or so. I had three, maybe 4 subspecies of Coastals on my place. Some color and some structure of the sub limbs on the long limbs.

I have seed from the Sempervirens I'm going to try to grow in my greenhouse. They don't really need fog, just water. The fog is dropped to the roots off the tree as rain. I have a few Dawn seeds I'll try one at a time...

And the range of the Costals and Giants were to the Mississippi river before the mountains in the western part of the US rose and cut off the water. The giant stones and logs in the petrified forest in Arizona are Sempervirens. They have been around since the Jurassic period.

Currently the range is in France, I got a small grove going there near Bordeaux. And there is a large stand in northern Scotland. The attempt was to spread the species in case of a unique issue in the life of the earth destroyed the stands in California. Chemical or imported bug has shown itself to destroy the Chestnut groves and pine tree (on going). With silicon valley and petrochemical plants in the area anything could happen.

Martin

Reply to
Martin Eastburn

people like to believe what they want i would not play the spoiler

sure thing

Reply to
Electric Comet

I'd say growing seasons is the soft more alive ring area and the hard ring is the winter very slow growing.

The Redwoods would grow a foot or more on every rain or heavy fog. After a fair rain, you could stand outside and hear the wood swell.

We had one near the house that was maybe a 30" sapling (diameter) and as it grew upward the trunk rotated. The lower limbs were trimmed off the deck only to have new ones sweep inward towards the house. Not all did that and I think the wood might be beautiful if cut, but have no idea on strength with twisted grain.

Mart> >>> >>>>> >>>>>

Reply to
Martin Eastburn

...

Pshaw! You made the claim, show the basis in the research, otherwise admit you're just "making it up".

Reply to
dpb

He does not seem to be capable of communicating whether it be from lack of education or just being lazy. I seriously doubt he could find the information you are asking him to produce, again for the above reasons.

Reply to
Leon

On 01/10/2016 9:53 AM, Leon wrote: ...

Yes, Leon, I shouldn't let myself get riled, but I do hate for actual misinformation to be unchallenged in rec.woodworking simply for posterity if nothing else (and, if there were really something to the claim it'd be nice to know what it _really_ was that tried to report; often it is so that a research conclusion is badly misstated as to what that conclusion really was).

Reply to
dpb

And, of course, even if it were true (which I truly doubt), I'm not going to start proclaiming it based on the above assertions without evidence of what it is that is actually being proclaimed...otoh, if that were to be made manifest, then I'd be more than happy to have been educated on the specific point and glad to proselytize it where it were to be significant and in consonance with the then-current discussion. :)

Reply to
dpb

Huh? Redwood is a conifer, thus a softwood. ...or is there some variety of Redwood that's crossed the line?

Reply to
krw

Look it up yourself. Redwood is considered both structural for beams and a hard wood. If the wood is old - e.g. sawed months or years ago it is hard to nail through. Not much sap inside so it lasts and lasts.

Being a cone bearing tree doesn't make it a softwood. Just like the mighty oak decays faster than the fast growing popular.

And have you ever built a deck with redwood and one of pine or oak ? pine fails fastest, then the oak then after more time the redwood takes a refinishing and resealing.

I had a back deck that had 6x6 posts that were 22 feet long (tall). The deck attached to the ground floor of the house and the outside on top of these tall posts. After 17 years the posts were good as new and had sharp square corners. Softwood would melt away.

We were getting 60" in low rain years, 30 when it didn't rain and over

100 when it poured. It was a rain forest with moss and fern all over.

formatting link

Some call it soft because they don't use it. Some call it hard because the experts call it that way. And the lumber stores call it that way. It is a different species than conus or pines. Different rings and structure.

Mart> >

Reply to
Martin Eastburn

A hard wood and a hardwood are not the same. Balsa is a hardwood but it is not a hard wood.

Yes, it does.

??? What does decaying have to do with biological taxonomy? And if you know of a source of non-torrefied poplar that holds up to the elements better than white oak then please share it.

So what?

Unless it's redwood.

So? It's still a softwood.

You seem to th> > > >

Reply to
J. Clarke

Whether the wood is actually hard or soft, it does not matter to be technically called one or the other. As I believe it has been pointed out it is mostly determined by the leaves and or fruit.

Balsa is considered a hardwood, the wood is not. SYP is considered to be a softwood, the wood is not.

Reply to
Leon

On 01/10/2016 9:59 PM, Martin Eastburn wrote: ...

Ah, there is confusion. Being a "softwood" doesn't (necessarily) make it a "soft" wood. There's a distinct difference between the two; the former is a noun describing the broad taxonomic classification to which a given species belongs whereas the other is a combination of adjective applied to the noun describing the property of the particular species.

Again I refer you to the FPL tome, this time Chapters 2 and 5--

Classification of primary species by the broad taxonomy to which they belong--

Table 2?1. Major resources of U.S. woods according to region

Western Northern and Appalachian Southern

Hardwoods Alder, red Ash Ash Ash, Oregon Aspen Basswood Aspen Basswood Beech Birch, paper Beech Butternut Cottonwood Birch Cottonwood Maple, bigleaf Buckeye Elm Oak, California black Butternut Hackberry Oak, Oregon white Cherry Hickory Tanoak Cottonwood Honeylocust Elm Locust, black Hackberry Magnolia Hickory Maple, soft Honeylocust Oak, red and white Locust, black Sassafras Maple, hard Sweetgum Maple, soft Sycamore Oak, red and white Tupelo Sycamore Walnut Walnut Willow Yellow-poplar Yellow-poplar

Softwoods Douglas-fir Cedar, northern white Baldcypress Fir, western Fir, balsam Cedar, Atlantic white Hemlock, western Hemlock, eastern Fir, Fraser and mountain Pine, eastern white Pine, southern Incense-cedar Pine, Jack Redcedar, eastern Larch, western Pine, red Pine, lodgepole Redcedar, eastern Pine, ponderosa Spruce, eastern Pine, sugar Tamarack Pine, western white Port-Orford-cedar Redcedar, western Redwood Spruce, Engelmann Spruce, Sitka Yellow-cedar

Measured mechanical properties for some selected species for comparison. Note: "Hardness" here is the modified Janka compression test which is measured by the load required to embed a roughly half-inch (0.444") diameter ball to one-half its diameter depth.

Table 5?3b. Strength properties of some commercially important woods grown in the United States

Static bending

Modulus of Side Common species Moisture Specific elasticity hardness names content gravity (xE6lbf in?2) (lbf)

Hardwoods

Ash Black Green 0.45 1.04 520 12% 0.49 1.60 850 White Green 0.55 1.44 960 12% 0.60 1.74 1320 Aspen Quaking Green 0.35 0.86 300 12% 0.38 1.18 350 Beech, American Green 0.56 1.38 859 12% 0.64 1.72 1300 Cherry, black Green 0.47 1.31 600 12% 0.50 1.49 950 Locust, black Green 0.66 1.85 1570 12% 0.69 2.05 1700 Yellow-poplar Green 0.40 1.22 440 12% 0.42 1.58 540

Softwoods Cedar Eastern red Green 0.44 0.65 650 12% 0.47 0.88 ? Western red Green 0.31 0.94 260 12% 0.32 1.11 350 Douglas-fir Coast Green 0.45 1.56 500 12% 0.48 1.95 710 Interior South Green 0.43 1.16 360 12% 0.46 1.49 510 Pine Eastern white Green 0.34 0.99 290 12% 0.35 1.24 380 Longleaf Green 0.54 1.59 590 12% 0.59 1.98 870 Ponderosa Green 0.38 1.00 320 12% 0.40 1.29 460 Redwood Old-growth Green 0.38 1.18 410 12% 0.40 1.34 480 Young-growth Green 0.34 0.96 350 12% 0.35 1.10 420

I've picked a few of various well-known and used species from each category with an eye to illustrating characteristics. As can be seen, in general it's certainly true the "hardwoods" are harder than the "softwoods" which is clearly the reason the generic classification came to be. Much like the "annual ring" vis a vis "growth ring" nomenclature, it's common idiomatic and not really entirely accurate but it's so established it's what is used for commercial classification and hence is the convention even amongst research organizations such as US FPL to retain it for that general use.

Interestingly, one can note that while old-growth redwood is a wonderful wood for many of its properties (not the least of which is, of course, that there's so much clear grain owing to the size of the log), it really isn't _that_ hard in comparison with the other structural pines and is in fact quite soft compared to the typical SYP (of which I chose Longleaf as representative of the classification which is again a trade/commercial grading of several closely related species that are essentially indistinguishable, not any single species). In comparison to an Eastern white pine or cedar it is quite a lot harder, yes.

So, upshot is, don't take the designation of redwood as a "softwood" as any denigration of the wood itself; it's merely the classification in which it falls by its taxonomy and commercial classification.

Reply to
dpb

yes it does. Just like balsa is considered a hardwood. Technically speaking, deciduous = hardwood, conifer=softwood. That has nothing to do with it's actual hardness since balsa is one of the softest woods.

Just like the

Reply to
woodchucker

Try reformatting the tables -- use a fixed font and should be moderately legible now w/o tab spacing--

Table 2?1. Major resources of U.S. woods according to region

Western Northern and Appalachian Southern

Hardwoods Alder, red Ash Ash Ash, Oregon Aspen Basswood Aspen Basswood Beech Birch, paper Beech Butternut Cottonwood Birch Cottonwood Maple, bigleaf Buckeye Elm Oak, California black Butternut Hackberry Oak, Oregon white Cherry Hickory Tanoak Cottonwood Honeylocust Elm Locust, black Hackberry Magnolia Hickory Maple, soft Honeylocust Oak, red and white Locust, black Sassafras Maple, hard Sweetgum Maple, soft Sycamore Oak, red and white Tupelo Sycamore Walnut Walnut Willow Yellow-poplar Yellow-poplar

Softwoods Douglas-fir Cedar, northern white Baldcypress Fir, western Fir, balsam Cedar, Atlantic white Hemlock, western Hemlock, eastern Fir, Fraser and mountain Pine, eastern white Pine, southern Incense-cedar Pine, Jack Redcedar, eastern Larch, western Pine, red Pine, lodgepole Redcedar, eastern Pine, ponderosa Spruce, eastern Pine, sugar Tamarack Pine, western white Port-Orford-cedar Redcedar, western Redwood Spruce, Engelmann Spruce, Sitka Yellow-cedar

Measured mechanical properties for some selected species for comparison. Note: "Hardness" here is the modified Janka compression test which is measured by the load required to embed a roughly half-inch (0.444") diameter ball to one-half its diameter depth.

Table 5?3b. Strength properties of some commercially important woods grown in the United States

Modulus of Common species Moisture Specific Side Elasticity Hardness names content gravity (xE6lbf in?2) (lbf)

Hardwoods Ash Black Green 0.45 1.04 520 12% 0.49 1.60 850 White Green 0.55 1.44 960 12% 0.60 1.74 1320 Aspen Quaking Green 0.35 0.86 300 12% 0.38 1.18 350 Beech, American Green 0.56 1.38 859 12% 0.64 1.72 1300 Cherry, black Green 0.47 1.31 600 12% 0.50 1.49 950 Locust, black Green 0.66 1.85 1570 12% 0.69 2.05 1700 Yellow-poplar Green 0.40 1.22 440 12% 0.42 1.58 540

Softwoods Cedar Eastern red Green 0.44 0.65 650 12% 0.47 0.88 ? Western red Green 0.31 0.94 260 12% 0.32 1.11 350 Douglas-fir Coast Green 0.45 1.56 500 12% 0.48 1.95 710 Interior South Green 0.43 1.16 360 12% 0.46 1.49 510 Pine Eastern white Green 0.34 0.99 290 12% 0.35 1.24 380 Longleaf Green 0.54 1.59 590 12% 0.59 1.98 870 Ponderosa Green 0.38 1.00 320 12% 0.40 1.29 460 Redwood Old-growth Green 0.38 1.18 410 12% 0.40 1.34 480 Young-growth Green 0.34 0.96 350 12% 0.35 1.10 420

Reply to
dpb

The technical difference isn't whether, or not, it drops leaves (deciduous). Many conifers drop leaves every year. The delineation is made based on the seeds. If the seeds are contained in the ovary, it's a hardwood. If the seeds are external, on the leaves (cones included), it's a softwood.

There are a lot of weird varieties of plants around and I didn't know if there were an exception to the soft/hardwood thing in Redwoods.

Reply to
krw

HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.