4.5 Article

Moisture movement on drying softwood boards and kiln design

期刊

DRYING TECHNOLOGY
卷 20, 期 10, 页码 1955-1974

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.1081/DRT-120015578

关键词

softwoods; kiln-drying; moisture movement; kiln design; airflow

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper provides an overview of present understanding of how moisture can move through softwood boards, as a basis for determining kiln-seasoning strategies. Moisture in green wood is held essentially unbound, whereas below fibre saturation it is bound to a variable extent to the fibre walls. Sapwood, which is that part of the timber used for the transport of liquid nutrients, contains more moisture than physiologically inactive heartwood. Sawing the felled log creates a moisture-denuded layer at the damaged exposed surfaces. These features have a profound influence on the way that moisture can be removed on drying. Superimposed are differences arising from seasonal variations in the growth of wood between earlywood and latewood, which have different moisture permeabilities. When the width of the annual growth ring is relatively large compared with the board dimensions, moisture movement and the development of drying stresses depend markedly upon the sawing orientation relative to the grain direction. Quarter-sawn boards dry more uniformly (in the direction normal to the drying surfaces), but more slowly than flat-sawn boards. Most timber boards are stacked and then dried in box-shaped kilns. The uniformity of drying depends on the goodness of this stacking and on a uniform airflow being presented to the inlet face of the stack. Some non-uniformities can be mitigated by periodic reversals of the airflow direction through the stack and by overdrying the majority of boards to reduce wet spots, but there are limits, while overdrying reduces kiln capacity. Attention to aspects of the kiln geometry can reduce the fan-energy requirements and shorten the drying time, with a more uniform moisture content through out the kiln load.

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

4.5
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