Identify this?

Ron Wenrich · October 29, 2006, 12:57:30 AM

Let me think back to those days in Wood Utiliztion 327. Basically it was wood ID. They gave us a bunch of pine, had us cut the ends off of pieces of wood and ID them through a microscope.

Then, they gave us the hardwoods. We couldn't cut through those things worth beans. Usually when we could get a sample, they were too thick for the light to shine through. I think that ironwood kinda turned us off. We learned to ID through sight.

I remember the words of my dendrology prof when asked to expand on the differences between the bark appearnce between walnut, tulip poplar, and ash. His answer " Well, it just doesn't look like anything else". :D Its kinda stuck with me after all these years.

SwampDonkey · October 29, 2006, 07:41:48 AM

Quote from: Ron Wenrich on October 29, 2006, 12:57:30 AM

Then, they gave us the hardwoods. We couldn't cut through those things worth beans. Usually when we could get a sample, they were too thick for the light to shine through. I think that ironwood kinda turned us off. We learned to ID through sight.

I think your utility knife blade needed replacing Ron. ;D :D Gotta watch the fingers. ;) I've scraped and looked at them under the disecting microscope, no trouble. But, as far as seeing wood rays and vessels all ya need is a hand lens or naked eye. I wouldn't care to id the wood with a microscope, you do damage to the slice and mess up the sample. :

Riles · October 29, 2006, 03:41:38 PM

I've got 45 samples sitting in a plastic baggy right here waiting for my next test, but I don't know how to get a good picture. Any suggestions?

SwampDonkey · October 29, 2006, 04:09:54 PM

Need a good camera with a good magnification lens (es). An ordinary lens will have a focal length of around 4 feet, too far away. Too close and your picture is nothing but fuzz. Some cameras have a closeup function. Maybe someone's scanner has high res, not interpreted high res, and can scan some end grain. Been such a dark dreary day I didn't get down to the barn where my lumber is.

Dan_Shade · October 29, 2006, 04:46:54 PM

why not get a good shot of the endgrain under magnification?

SwampDonkey · October 29, 2006, 05:05:43 PM

Here's a sample of hard maple I cut with a hand saw. I thought I'de never get through that 2 x 6 maple plank.

~7x magnification

You can see the wood rays quite well in this, marked with black lines from the lables. The wood vessels are not easy to see because of the saw marks (45 deg sawtooth hatches). I scanned at 1200 DPI and increased the contrast. The wood was wetted with some saliva. ;D Someone could try a 2400 or 3200 dpi scanner, just preview and highlight a tiny section before scanning or your going to wait awhile. ;)

More samples tommorrow....

SwampDonkey · October 30, 2006, 09:21:59 AM

Yellow birch end grain: Often growth rings won't be seen without hand lens. Pores appear as white dots to naked eye, largest pore wider than large ray, uniform in size. Rays are not distinct with naked eye.

Black cherry: Rays distinct with naked eye. Pores not visible without magnification.

White Ash: Earlywood pores are large, distinct to naked eye, forming band of 2-4 pores. Latewood pores small with parenchyma forming narrow sheath around the pores. Rays are barely visible to naked eye.

Butternut: Earlywood pores visible to naked eye, fairly uniform but decreasing in size on the outer margin of the ring, diffuse to semi-diffuse porous. Rays indistinct without hand lens, uniform width.

SawDust_Studios · October 30, 2006, 11:19:26 AM

Very informative. Now I need to take my magnifying glass out to the ole' wood pile. :D

SwampDonkey · October 30, 2006, 11:50:19 AM

Just to skirt some cornfusion ;) , my use of 'vessel' <> pore. You'll also notice that on diffuse porous wood, such as maple, the early wood is wider than the latewood. On ring porous wood the darker ring is early wood because of the larger pores making it appear darker, but it is less dense.

Also, the pores go out radially between the wood rays. In other words, a ray doesn't cut through a pore. If it looks that way, like on butternut, or white oak, that is tylosis and nothing to do with a ray.

metalspinner · October 30, 2006, 01:05:27 PM

8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8)

That's what I'm talking about, Swampdonkey!

Are these pics you took yourself? Maybe we (someone

) can start archiving samples like this here?

SwampDonkey · October 30, 2006, 05:10:29 PM

I've moved some of my posts into the Tree ID board. If anyone has a hi res scanner and a good sharp blade, scan some samples (wet the sample first to bring out the grain). I can take some pics up to 200 k in my email (found on my website) if you want me to identify and write up some feature (gross) to id a piece of wood. Just give me the heads up in an IM. If you know what the wood is, just tell me and I can label some features on the sample that helps identify it.