文献类型：期刊文献

中文题名：木材微纤丝角四种测试方法对比研究

英文题名：Comparison of Four Kinds of Measurement Techniques for Wood Microfibril Angle

作者：黄艳辉[1] 费本华[1] 赵荣军[2]

第一作者：黄艳辉

通信作者：Fei, BH[1]

机构：[1]国家林业局北京林业机械研究所,北京100029;[2]中国林业科学研究院木材工业研究所,北京100091

年份：2009

期号：6

起止页码：1682-1686

中文期刊名：光谱学与光谱分析

外文期刊名：Spectroscopy and Spectral Analysis

收录：CSTPCD;;EI(收录号：20092712164052);Scopus(收录号：2-s2.0-67649234084);WOS:【SCI-EXPANDED(收录号:WOS:000266681400057)】；北大核心:【北大核心2008】；CSCD:【CSCD2011_2012】；PubMed;

基金：国家自然科学基金重点项目(C02060102);国家“十一五”科技支撑项目(2008BADA9B01)资助

语种：中文

中文关键词：X射线衍射法;偏振光显微镜法;纹孔观察法;近红外光谱预测法;木材微纤丝角

外文关键词：X-ray diffraction; Polarized light microscope; Pit aperture observing technique; Near infrared spectrum;Wood mierofibril angle

分类号：O657.3

摘要：分别采用X射线衍射法、偏振光显微镜法、纹孔观察法和近红外光谱预测法对杉木木材的微纤丝角进行了测定,结果表明:对于同一株杉木,纹孔观察法测得的微纤丝角平均值最大,X射线衍射法次之,偏振光显微镜法最小,三种方法得到的微纤丝角差异不显著;对于不同年轮的微纤丝角,X射线衍射法测定值于第20年轮以后变得最大,纹孔观察法测定值上下浮动最大,偏振光显微镜法测定值相对最为集中,越远离髓心三种方法的测定值曲线吻合得越好,同一年轮微纤丝角采用不同方法测定时差异不显著;对于同一年轮的微纤丝角,偏振光显微镜法得到的最大值与最小值相差不大于4°,而纹孔观察法相差达到21.53°,其标准偏差也达到4.75。近红外光谱预测法和X射线衍射法均属于无损检测法,它们两个联立建立的模型精度高,预测性和重现性好、便于实现在线分析,其校正模型和验证模型的相关系数R2分别达到了0.81和0.75,校正标准误差和预测标准误差分别为1.79和2.02。另外,其他三种方法均可以与近红外光谱技术联用来预测该木材的微纤丝角,显示了近红外光谱技术无与伦比的优越性。同时,文章分析了这四种方法的优缺点,探讨了产生这种结果的原因,以便为广大研究者提供参考。
X-ray diffraction technique, pit aperture observing technique, polarized light microscope technique and near infrared spectrum technique were used separately to test the wood microfibril angle of Chinese fir, and the results were as follows： For the identical tree of Chinese fir, the average microfibril angle obtained by the polarized light microscope technique was the biggest, followed by those obtained by X-ray diffraction technique, and then by polarized light microscope technique, but the difference in the average microfihrit angle was not significant. For the different annual rings, the microfibril angle obtained by X-ray diffraction technique became the biggest after the 20th annual ring, the fluctuation of the microfibril angle got by the pit aperture observing technique were big, but the fluctuation got by the polarized light microscope technique was just the reverse. The measurement value curves got by the three techniques were fitted well, and the difference in the average microfibril angle was not signifieant between different annual rings. For the microfibril angle of the same annual ring, the difference between the maximum and the minimum value tested by the polarized light microscope technique was less than 4°, but the difference tested by the pit aperture observing technique achieved 21.53°, and the standard deviation achieved 4.75. The near infrared spectrum and the X- ray diffraction techniques were all called nondestructive testing techniques. The model set up by the two techniques was very good because of its high prediction and repeatability, and the model was also good for online analysis. The R^2 of calibration model and tested model achieved 0. 81 and 0. 75 respectively, and the standard error of calibration and prediction were 1.79 and 2.02 respectively. In addition, the near infrared spectrum technique could be also used with the other three techniques to predict the wood microfibril angle, showing the superiority of the near infrared spectrum technique. Meanwhile, the advantages and shortcomings were analyzed for the four kinds of measurement techniques.