4.2 Article

Multivariate modelling of density, strength and stiffness from near infrared spectra for mature, juvenile and pith wood of longleaf pine (Pinus palustris)

期刊

JOURNAL OF NEAR INFRARED SPECTROSCOPY
卷 11, 期 5, 页码 365-378

出版社

N I R PUBLICATIONS
DOI: 10.1255/jnirs.388

关键词

multivariate; principal component; multiple linear; regression; density; modulus; NIR; spectroscopy; wood; lumber

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In manufacturing, monitoring the mechanical properties of wood with near infrared spectroscopy (NIR) is an attractive alternative to more conventional methods. However, no attention has been given to see if models differ between juvenile and mature wood. Additionally, it would be convenient if multiple linear regression (MLR) could perform well in the place of more complicated multivariate models. Therefore, the purpose of this paper was to model the strength, stiffness and density of mature and juvenile longleaf pine to NIR spectra with MLR and principal component regression (PCR). MLR performed almost as well as PCR when predicting density, modulus of rupture (MOR) and modulus of elasticity (MOE). Choosing wavelengths associated with wood chemistry and developing principal components gave better predictive models (PCR2) than when all NIR wavelengths were used (PCR1). Models developed from mature wood did not predict wood properties from juvenile wood adequately, suggesting that separate models are needed. However, for density prediction, the area under the spectral curve appeared to be insensitive to mature and juvenile wood differences. Five of the six wavelengths associated with MOE were also associated with MOR, perhaps accounting for how MOE and MOR might be related. For pith wood, MOE and MOR were poorly related to NIR spectra, while density was strongly correlated. This inability to predict mechanical properties in the pith-wood zone warrants attention for those manufacturers interested in using near infrared to stress rate lumber within a mill.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据