Hello Neil,

as you rightly pointed out, they are all in reasonable range for the species, but do not perfectly correlate (at least, not all of them). In my experience, the deflection method is is not very reliable, while the opposite is true for a dynamic test.

Did you try to repeat both test on the same sample to check dispersion?

Cheers,

Giuliano

Wow dude ! That looks fantastic !

OK, that is fine, thank you Ian.

I’d like to add this supplier to the useful links posts. Do you mind if I give you authorship since you recommended ?

For the sake of future generations, I buy my celluloid binding from Rothco and Frost in the UK. Good product, reasonable cost, and shipping cost has been comparable to STANDARD US shipping.

Search: 61 results found for “celluloid binding” – Rothko and Frost

The units are gigapascals for flexural modulus on both axes. One calculated from frequency and the other from deflection. They’re within a reasonable range for spruce, just no correlation between the two methods.

I agree that the regression basically shows no fit at all. What are the units you are using on the X and Y axis? They don’t line up will values I would expect to see. E.g., what are the deflection units (are 9/5 to 13 in thousandths?), and the frequency units (10-13 doesn’t make any sense to me for frequency units).

See the Michael M and Michael B entries in the “Side Bending” thread below