Evaluating Brazilian Wood Species for Utility Pole and Cross Arm Use

David M. Carradine, Ph. D. Research Engineer and Technical Director for Structural Testing Washington State University Wood Materials and Engineering Laboratory Pullman, WA USA J. R. Gonzalez, P. E. Senior Technical Advisor Rogers International Consulting, LLC Salem, OR USA

Summary
Flexural testing was conducted on eight species of Brazilian hardwoods to evaluate the mechanical properties of the wood and determine if these species would suffice for use as utility poles and cross arms for use in the power distribution, transmission and communications industries. Three species were tested as full-scale poles and five species were tested as full-scale cross arms. Additional tests were conducted on specimens taken from each of the tested poles to assess flexural, compression parallel to grain, and hardness properties in addition to growth characteristics, which were documented for cross arm specimens also. Comparisons were made between properties of species tested and wood species typically used for these applications in North America. Keywords: tropical hardwood, utility pole, cross arms, large-scale testing, mechanical properties

1.

Introduction

Toxic chemical treatments of wood and wood based materials used to extend the life of these materials when exposed to exterior conditions are becoming less popular with consumers and environmental advocates, resulting in the need for manufacturers of chemically treated wood to seek alternative means of providing durable wood products. Utility poles and cross arms for utility poles have traditionally been treated with creosote and chromated copper arsenate (CCA), both of which are now considered unsafe for most treatment applications. Utilizing wood species that have natural resistance to decay and attack from insects is one alternate method for providing naturally durable wood products, rather than chemically treated ones. Numerous species of wood from Brazil have proven to be extremely durable under exterior exposure based on laboratory studies and field investigations of these species in harsh environments around the world [6]. While concrete, steel and fibreglass and also alternatives to chemically treated poles, their use requires significant changes in equipment and procedures used by utility companies, which results in higher costs for these poles. The current research considered eight wood species to be assessed for use in utility pole and cross arm applications. Abiurana Ferro, Acariquara and Mata Mata Preto were the three species tested as utility poles, and Cupiuba, Guajara, Piquia, Tauari Vermelho and Timborana were the species tested as cross arms. Full-scale testing was conducted according to ANSI 05.1 [1] and ANSI 05.3 [2] to determine the mechanical properties of these woods and their suitability for use as utility poles and cross arms, respectively. Provided in sections below are descriptions of the testing performed and test results, along with comparisons of properties with wood species commonly used for utility poles and cross arms in North America. All species utilized for testing have been and will be harvested using environmentally sustainable methods under certification processes that ensure these woods are being responsibly harvested and that the use of these materials is not detrimental to the ecology of the Brazilian forests.

2.

Experimental Methods

2.1 Introduction All utility pole testing was conducted based on requirements of ANSI 05.1 2002, American National Standard for Wood Poles [1], which stipulate that full-scale pole testing be performed according to ASTM D 1036 99 Standard Test Methods of Static Tests of Wood Poles [5]. Supplemental testing conducted as required by ASTM D 1036 99 was performed on specimens obtained from a section of each pole between the ground line (1.98 m from the butt end) and the butt end, and included tests for specific gravity, moisture content, and sapwood thickness, and small clear specimen tests for flexural strength and stiffness, compressive strength and hardness according to ASTM D 143 94 (Reapproved 2000), Standard Test Methods for Small Clear Specimens of Timber [3]. Cross arm testing was conducted based on requirements of ANSI 05.3 2002, American National Standard for Wood Products Solid Sawn-Wood Crossarms and Braces [2], which stipulate that full-scale cross arms be tested according to ASTM D 198-02 Standard Test Methods for Static Tests of Lumber in Structural Sizes [4], Sections 4 11, and Annex B of ANSI 05.3 2002, which specifies a support span of 2.24 m and a loading span of 0.56 m. Supplemental testing conducted on 25.4 mm thick slices taken from each cross arm tested included moisture content and density, and visual observations of growth rings per cm, slope of grain, and percent summerwood. 2.2 Utility Pole Testing Methodologies Flexural testing of poles was conducted according to ASTM D 1036 99 [5], Sections 20 23, utilizing the machine test method, which specifies a simple support span of 12.8 m, when testing 13.7 m long poles, where the tip end is supported 0.61 m in from the end, and the butt end is supported 0.31 m in from the end, and where both supports allow for rotation and longitudinal movement of the pole during testing. Loads were applied at the ground line, which was 1.98 m in from the butt end, utilizing a servo controlled hydraulic actuator under displacement control using a loading rate based on the circumference at the ground line of each pole. The testing apparatus is shown in Figure 1. Measurements of ground line deflection were obtained using a linear variable differential transformer (LVDT) internal to the hydraulic actuator used to apply load to the specimens. Applied load at the ground line, load at the tip end support, and actuator movement were obtained continuously throughout testing and were recorded using a computer controlled data acquisition system. All poles were tested to failure and descriptions of each failure type recorded and photographed with a digital camera, and included approximate location of failures where appropriate. Following failure, pole specimens were taken out of the test apparatus and the section from the butt end up to the ground line was cut off and weighed. The segment cut from each pole was used to prepare supplemental test specimens as described below. Prior to flexural testing, each specimen was weighed and measured for overall length, circumference at tip end, ground line, and butt end, and temperature.

Figure 1. Pole Testing Apparatus Shown Following Failure of Abiurana Ferro Pole From each cut off butt end segment, two 25.4 mm thick disks were cut at 0.31 m from the ground line toward the butt of the pole, as described in ASTM D 1036-99 [5] Section 25. One of these was used to determine age, sapwood thickness, and number of rings per cm. Age and number of rings per cm were virtually impossible to determine visually, even with a 10x hand lens, due to the indistinct nature of the growth rings, which is typical for certain tropical species due to a lack of distinct growing seasons. Efforts were made to conduct density profiles of cross sections from several poles, but results were inconclusive, indicating primarily that the density of the species from pith to bark was extremely consistent and that growth rings as commonly observed in North American softwoods were not discernable. Sapwood thickness for each pole was the average of four measurements taken at quarter point locations around the edge of the disks. The second disk was cut along radii into six, approximately equal segments, from which three nonadjacent segments were used for determining moisture content and the remaining three were used to determine specific gravity. The remaining cut sections from each pole were used to obtain small clear specimens for hardness, compression and flexural testing. Care was taken to obtain these specimens from locations as close to the outer surface of the poles as possible without having defects in them. These were cut into specimens with 51 mm by 51 mm cross sections and 762 mm lengths for flexure testing, 152 mm lengths for hardness, and 203 mm lengths for compression testing. It was not possible to obtain 51 mm by 51 mm specimens in the required lengths without defects for all poles, due to either cracks in the wood, splits caused by testing, or in the case of Acariquara there was not enough solid wood between voids to get an acceptable sample. ASTM D 1036 [5] Section 26.1 allows for smaller specimens to be obtained in the event that the previously mentioned sizes cannot be fashioned from the pole butt ends. Five hardness, compression, and flexure specimens were obtained from each pole butt end. Small, clear specimens were tested for static bending strength, compression strength parallel to grain and hardness according to ASTM D 143 94 (Reapproved 2000) [3], Sections 8, 9, and 13, respectively.

2.3 Cross Arm Testing Methodologies Cross arm specimens were supplied in ready to test dimensions of approximately 0.095 x 0.121 x 2.50 m. Full-scale testing of five cross arm species consisted of obtaining measurements and testing each specimen in flexure according to ASTM D 198-02 [4], Sections 4 11, and Annex B of ANSI 05.3 2002 [2], which specifies a support span of 2.24 m and a loading span of 0.56 m. Prior to flexural testing, each specimen was weighed and measured for overall length, average width, and average depth. Average width and depth measurements were obtained by averaging three measurements taken at the centre and at the location of the support at each end. Any defects that were visible were noted and placed on the tension side for testing. Thirty specimens of each species were tested about the major and minor axis for a total of 60 specimens tested per species. Flexure specimens were tested utilizing the apparatus shown in Figure 2. Rate of loading was determined for each specie and orientation using the equation provided in Section 9 of ASTM D 198-02 [4]. Measurements of neutral axis deflection were obtained using an LVDT mounted to a yoke suspended from neutral axis points at the supports while monitoring downward deflection of a pin driven into each cross arm at the neutral axis at the centre of the support span. Applied load and crosshead movement were recorded directly from the testing machine. All measurements were obtained continuously throughout testing and were recorded using a computer controlled data acquisition system. All cross arms were tested to failure and descriptions of each failure type were recorded.

Figure 2. Cross Arm Testing Apparatus During Testing of Guajara Specimen Immediately following full-scale flexure testing, specimens were obtained from each cross arm to assess moisture content, density, growth rings per cm, slope of grain, and percentage of summerwood. Specimens used for these determinations were approximately 25.4 mm thick cross sectional slices that were cut as close to the failure as possible without having fractures or missing sections due to the failure of the cross arm. Immediately after cutting, the rectangular slices were weighed and measured for volume, and then were placed in an oven for drying. Specimens were weighed again after attaining oven-dry equilibrium to determine moisture content and density. In order to determine number of rings per cm, slope of grain and percent summerwood, each slice was sanded to more easily observe growth characteristics. Rings per cm were obtained by recording the number of rings over a 100 mm distance and dividing that number by 10. Slope of grain was

determined by measuring the deviation of grain across the grain and dividing it by the distance along the over which the deviation occurred. Slope of grain was determined for two adjacent faces and averaged for each cross arm. Percentage of summerwood was estimated through visual inspection and was categorized according to Annex B of ANSI 05.3 2002 [2].

3.

Analysis and Results

Applied load and ground line displacement data from pole tests were utilized to calculate Modulus of Rupture at Ground Line (MORGL) and Modulus of Rupture at Break Point (MORBP) for each specimen. MORGL values were calculated utilizing equations provided in ASTM D 1036 99 [5], Section 23.2, and maximum moments were calculated at the approximate location of breakage assuming a linear decrease in moment from the ground line to the tip end support to calculate MORBP. When appropriate, the point of failure was estimated to be near the centre of the failed region, but in some cases (full-length horizontal shear failures) this was not feasible, and for those poles the MORBP value was assumed to the same as the MORGL. Additionally, due to significant distortion of poles at the region of failure it was typically very difficult to obtain a measurement of the pole circumference at break point. Therefore, MORBP was calculated assuming a uniform taper from ground line to tip to determine circumference at the break point. Table 1 provides average results for each of the three pole species for maximum applied load, equivalent tip load, MORGL, standard deviation, and coefficient of variation (COV). Table 2 provides average results for moisture content, specific gravity, and sapwood thickness based on 30 specimens tested for each species. Table 3 provides species averages for test results obtained from small clear testing of specimens obtained from each pole. Table 1. Average Results for Full-Scale Flexural Pole Testing Species Abiurana Ferro Acariquara Mata Mata Preto Maximum Applied Load (kN) 306.8 102.6 217.6 Equivalent Tip Load (kN) 40.2 13.8 29.4 MORGL (MPa) 108.5 53.3 87.4 MORGL Standard Deviation (MPa) 19.4 12.9 20.9 MORGL COV (%) 17.8% 24.2% 23.9%

Table 2. Average Results for Supplemental Utility Pole Testing on Disks Species Abiurana Ferro Acariquara Mata Mata Preto Heartwood Moisture Content (%) 32.5% 35.7% 51.3% Sapwood Moisture Content (%) 28.5% 25.2% 29.2% Average Moisture Content (%) 30.5% 30.4% 40.3% Specific Gravity 0.90 0.81 0.82 Sapwood Thickness (mm) 45 23 38

Table 3. Average Results for Small Clear Specimen Testing Species Abiurana Ferro Acariquara Mata Mata Preto MOR (MPa) 150.3 134.5 120.0 MOE (MPa) 22,960 16,340 17,930 Maximum Compression Stress (MPa) 75.2 60.7 51.0 Average Radial and Tangential Hardness (kN) 12.5 8.2 9.8 End Grain Hardness (kN) 9.6 7.6 9.2

Applied load and centre line displacement data were recorded throughout each cross arm flexure test and were utilized to calculate Modulus of Elasticity (MOE) and Modulus of Rupture (MOR) for each specimen. MOE and MOR values were calculated utilizing equations provided in ANSI 05.3 2002 [2] Annex B and ASTM D 198-02 [4] Appendix X2, respectively. Table 4 provides average results for the five species tested for MOE, MOR, standard deviation, and coefficient of variation (COV) for each species and loading orientation. Table 5 provides average results for moisture content and density based on cross arms tested for each species. Table 4. Average Results for Static Bending Testing of Cross Arms Species Piquia Tauari Vermelho Timborana Cupiuba Guajara Piquia Tauari Vermelho Timborana Cupiuba Guajara Bending Axis Major Major Major Major Major Minor Minor Minor Minor Minor MOR (MPa) 69.6 59.2 74.3 70.9 76.2 67.6 63.6 79.2 71.2 76.5 MOR Standard Deviation (MPa) 11.5 12.0 16.3 13.5 5.0 12.5 10.2 14.8 13.2 4.5 MOR COV (%) 16.59% 20.22% 21.97% 19.10% 6.61% 18.47% 15.98% 18.70% 18.55% 5.91% MOE (MPa) 10,580 7,650 12,120 11,520 10,430 10,400 7,490 12,900 12,770 9,890 MOE Standard Deviation (MPa) 1,613 2,248 1,738 2,439 1,475 2,077 1,058 1,900 1,838 1,390 MOE COV (%) 15.25% 29.40% 14.33% 21.17% 14.14% 19.97% 14.13% 14.73% 14.39% 14.06%

Table 5. Average Moisture Content and Density of Cross Arms Species Piquia Tauari Vermelho Timborana Cupiuba Guajara Moisture Content 44.8% 34.6% 26.6% 36.3% 47.0% Density (g/cm3) 0.73 0.56 0.73 0.75 0.67

In order to ensure that there is a 75% confidence that the true mean of fibre stress is greater than the calculated value for fibre stress, ANSI 05.3 2002 [2] Annex C provides an equation for adjusting the maximum fibre stress, or MOR, which is based on the average calculated fibre stress, the sample size and the coefficient of variation for the group of tested specimens. Table C.1 in Annex C provides values from a one sided t distribution for 75% confidence that was used for adjusting fibre stress. Table 6 presents adjusted values for maximum fibre stress or MOR using the equation and t values provided in Annex C [2].

Table 6. Adjusted Fibre Stress Values for Each Cross Arm Species Tested Species Piquia Tauari Vermelho Timborana Cupiuba Guajara Piquia Tauari Vermelho Timborana Cupiuba Guajara Bending Axis Major Major Major Major Major Minor Minor Minor Minor Minor MOR (MPa) 69.6 59.2 74.3 70.9 76.2 67.6 63.6 79.2 71.2 76.5 Adjustment Factor 0.979 0.975 0.973 0.976 0.992 0.977 0.980 0.977 0.977 0.993 Adjusted MOR (MPa) 68.2 57.7 72.3 69.2 75.6 66.0 62.4 77.4 69.5 75.9

4.

Comparisons and Conclusions

Objectives of utility pole and cross arm testing of Brazilian hardwood species were to evaluate the physical and mechanical properties of these woods and to assess their applicability for these uses, particularly in comparison with wood species that are commonly used in North America, specifically Douglas Fir and Southern Pine. Tabulated data presented in the previous section provide quantification of the properties of these Brazilian wood species. Information provided in ANSI 05.1 2002 [1] requires that Douglas Fir and Southern Pine utility poles have fibre stress values greater than 54.2 MPa and 58.1 MPa, respectively, in order to be acceptable for use as utility poles. Full-scale flexure tests of Abiurana Ferro and Mata Mata Preto poles indicated that these species had greater fibre stress levels than either of the North American species. Testing of Acariquara poles showed that the maximum fibre stress this species was greater than requirements of Douglas Fir poles only. These data suggest that the three Brazilian species tested would provide adequate strength for use as utility poles based on ANSI 05.1 2002 [1] requirements. Additionally, Figure 3 provides a comparison of utility poles based on circumference of poles at the ground line, which indicates that while Acariquara had a strength roughly equal to that of the North American species, Abiurana Ferro and Mata Mata Preto had strengths that exceeded North American species of similar girth. Information provided in ANSI 05.3 2002 [2] requires that Douglas Fir cross arms for use as power and communication cross arms or heavy duty cross arms have fibre stress values greater than 53.8 MPa and 51.0 MPa, respectively, in order to be acceptable for these purposes. Full-scale flexure tests indicated that Cupiuba, Guajara, Piquia, Tauari Vermelho and Timborana, all had average fibre stress levels that exceeded these values. These data suggest that the five Brazilian species tested would provide adequate strength for use as cross arms based on ANSI 05.3 2002 [2] requirements. Some additional considerations for the use of these wood species for utility pole use include things such as the ability to climb the poles utilizing current practices and equipment, and the ability to drill into and install fasteners into the poles without having to purchase additional equipment. Field tests conducted by Rogers International Consulting, LLC and several utilities around the United States indicated that the only change in current practices for utility pole installation and maintenance required would be to keep the speed when drilling below 500 revolutions per minute. Therefore it is concluded that the wood species tested have suitable material and mechanical properties for use as cross arms and utility poles according to currently accepted standards.

Ground Line Circumferences (cm) 76 70 Horizontal Force (kN) 60 50 40 30 20 10 0

Figure 3. Utility Pole Comparisons Among Acariquara (ACA), Abiurana Ferro (AF), Mata Mata Preto (MMP), and Douglas Fir/Southern Pine (DF/SP) Based on Ground Line Circumference

83

89

95 103 109 116 123 130 136 142 149

DF/SP ACA MMP AF

5.
[1]

References
American National Standards Institute, Inc. (ANSI) Standards. 2002. ANSI 05.1-2002. American national standard for wood poles. Washington, D. C.: Alliance for Telecommunications Industry Solutions. American National Standards Institute, Inc. (ANSI) Standards. 2002. ANSI 05.3-2002. American National Standard for Wood Products Solid Sawn-Wood Crossarms and Braces. Washington, D. C.: Alliance for Telecommunications Industry Solutions. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) Standards. 2004. D 143-94 (2000) Standard test methods for small clear specimens of Timber. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) Standards. 2004. D 198-02. Standard test methods of static tests of lumber in structural sizes. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) Standards. 2004. D 1036-99. Standard test methods of wood poles. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM. Gonzalez, J. R. and A. Sundaram. 2005. No preservatives needed environmentally safe Brazilian tropical hardwoods are evaluated for use as poles and crossarms. Transmission and Distribution World December, 2005, pp. 28-34.

[2]

[3]

[4] [5] [6]