Chromated Copper Arsenate Preservative Treatment of North American Hardwoods. Part 1. CCA Fixation Performance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary We have examined chromated copper arsenate (CCA) wood preservative fixation at two selected temperatures in seven common North American hardwood species: red maple ( Acer rubrum L.), white birch ( Betula papyrifera Marsh.), yellow poplar ( Liriodendron tulipifera L.), trembling aspen ( Populus tremuloides Michx.), red oak ( Quercus rubra L.), basswood ( Tilia americana L.) and American beech ( Fagus grandifolia Ehrh.). The softwood red pine ( Pinus resinosa Ait.) was included for comparison. CCA component fixation was monitored by the expressate method at both 21°C and 50°C under non-drying conditions. Hexavalent chromium (CrVI) and total Cr, Cu and As contents of the expressate were determined at different times during fixation. Based on CCA fixation results it was possible to divide the examined hardwoods into a fast fixing group (beech, red oak and red maple), intermediate group (white birch and red pine) and slow fixing group (aspen, yellow poplar and basswood). The variable fixation rates for the different species could not be directly related to different anatomical and chemical attributes of the studied hardwoods, although there was an apparent relationship with density with more dense species fixing faster than low density species. However, the species differences appeared to be mainly influenced by types and amounts of extractives in the woods. In red maple, extraction resulted in a slowing of the fixation rate, while the opposite effect was seen in red oak.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".