[Footnote 25: Although the factor of heart or sapwood does not influence the mechanical properties of the wood and there is usually no difference in structure observable under the microscope, nevertheless sapwood is generally decidedly different from heartwood in its physical properties. It dries better and more easily than heartwood, usually with less shrinkage and little checking or honeycombing. This is especially the case with the more refractory woods, such as white oaks and _Eucalyptus globulus_ and _viminalis_. It is usually much more permeable to air, even in green wood, notably so in loblolly pine and even in white oak. As already stated, it is much more subject to decay. The sapwood of white oak may be impregnated with creosote with comparative ease, while the heartwood is practically impenetrable. These facts indicate a difference in its chemical nature.--H.D. Tiemann.]
In specifications for structural timbers reference is sometimes made to "boxheart," meaning the inclusion of the pith or centre of the tree within a cross section of the timber. From numerous experiments it appears that the position of the pith does not bear any relation to the strength of the material. Since most season checks, however, are radial, the position of the pith may influence the resistance of a seasoned beam to horizontal shear, being greatest when the pith is located in the middle half of the section.[26]
[Footnote 26: Bul. 108, U.S. Forest Service, p. 36.]
From data obtained from a large number of tests on the strength of different woods it appears that, other things being equal, the crushing strength parallel to the grain, fibre stress at elastic limit in bending, and shearing strength along the grain of wood vary in direct proportion to the weight of dry wood per unit of volume when green. Other strength values follow different laws. The hardness varies in a slightly greater ratio than the square of the density. The work to the breaking point increases even more rapidly than the cube of density. The modulus of rupture in bending lies between the first power and the square of the density. This, of course, is true only in case the greater weight is due to increase in the amount of wood substance. A wood heavy with resin or other infiltrated substance is not necessarily stronger than a similar specimen free from such materials. If differences in weight are due to degree of seasoning, in other words, to the relative amounts of water contained, the rules given above will of course not hold, since strength increases with dryness. But of given specimens of pine or of oak, for example, in the green condition, the comparative strength may be inferred from the weight. It is not permissible, however, to compare such widely different woods as oak and pine on a basis of their weights.[27]