Density of Briar

[pierredekat]

Okay, this has bugged me long enough.

Having worked with a variety of woods over the years on various projects, I have spent a fair amount of time doing mental comparisons of various wood types and their respective properties.

One thing I have learned is that there is a strong correlation between wood density and its strength. Some woods are fractionally better than others on the weight/strength scale, but there is a strong enough relationship between the two characteristics to make it a pretty fair cross-gauge.

I also think there's a strong connection between wood density and how resistant it is to charring, but I haven't seen any scientific data regarding wood density-versus-flammability to speak of. Mostly just anecdotal, really.

That said, I have never found any scientific data on briar. Like wouldn't you just love to see "briar" on somebody's wood toxicity chart? I know I would. I would almost bet money we'd all be a little surprised at how a moldy, worm-eaten root would fare.

Well, anywho, I have Googled for every possible variation of the search terms " briar wood density specific gravity ... yada, yada, yada ..." you can possibly imagine, but I have been unable to find a single figure. Not one.

Of course, I would have probably found a figure by now if folks here in the US didn't call everything "Briarwood Country Club" and "Briar Forest Estates" and so on.

So I finally decided to do my own calculations. And let me just state for the record that these are fairly crude calculations.

Basically I sanded three scraps of briar into rectangular blocks, calculated their volume as best I could, and weighed them on a jewelers' scale that I believe to be reasonably accurate.

* Block 1:
--- .392 oz. x (1 lb/16 oz.) = .0245 lb.
--- .780 in. x .535 in. x 2.015 in. x (1 ft3/1728 in3) = .0004866 ft3
--- .0245 lb / .0004866 ft3 = 50.35 lb/ft3

* Block 2:
--- 1.452 oz. x (1 lb/16 oz.) = .09075 lb.
--- 1.710 in. x .940 in. x 1.750 in. x (1 ft3/1728 in3) = .001628 ft3
--- .09075 lb / .001628 ft3 = 55.74 lb/ft3

* Block 3:
--- 1.135 oz. x (1 lb/16 oz.) = .0709 lb.
--- 1.397 in. x 1.030 in. x 1.637 in. x (1 ft3/1728 in3) = .001363 ft3
-- .0709 lb / .001363 ft3 = 52.01 lb/ft3

The average of these three blocks would be 52.7 pounds per cubic foot. For the metric folks, that's 844 kilograms per cubic meter. And the specific gravity would be .844 (or 84.4 percent as heavy as water).

Caveat: I'm using only three, very small blocks to do my calculations, though I did try to maintain 4-point precision, or thereabouts, when taking my measurements. Etc.

So definitely, I highly encourage others to post any data that they may have gathered. If your data agrees with or contradicts mine, I'd certainly like to know that.

For the sake of comparison, here's a chart of other wood densities:

Wood ***** Density (kg/cu.m) ***** Density (lbs/cu.ft)
Afromosia ***** 705 ***** 44.0
Apple ***** 660-830 ***** 41.2
Ash,black ***** 540 ***** 33.7
Ash,white ***** 670 ***** 41.8
Aspen ***** 420 ***** 26.2
Balsa ***** 170 ***** 10.6
Bamboo ***** 300-400 ***** 18.7 (Are they factoring in the airspace inside, or what?)
Birch(British) ***** 670 ***** 41.8
Cedar,red ***** 380 ***** 23.7
Cypress ***** 510 ***** 31.8
DouglasFir ***** 530 ***** 33.1
Ebony ***** 960-1120 ***** 59.9
Elm(English) ***** 600 ***** 37.5
Elm(Wych) ***** 690 ***** 43.1
Elm(Rock) ***** 815 ***** 50.9
Iroko ***** 655 ***** 40.9
Larch ***** 590 ***** 36.8
Lignum_Vitae ***** 1280-1370 ***** 79.9
Mahogany(Honduras) ***** 545 ***** 34.0
Mahogany(African) ***** 495-850 ***** 30.9
Maple ***** 755 ***** 47.1
Oak ***** 590-930 ***** 36.8
Pine(Oregon) ***** 530 ***** 33.1
Pine(Parana) ***** 560 ***** 35.0
Pine(Canadian) ***** 350-560 ***** 0.0
Pine(Red) ***** 370-660 ***** 23.1
Redwood(American) ***** 450 ***** 28.1
Redwood(European) ***** 510 ***** 31.8
Spruce(Canadian) ***** 450 ***** 28.1
Spruce(Sitka) ***** 450 ***** 28.1
Sycamore ***** 590 ***** 36.8
Teak ***** 630-720 ***** 39.3
Willow ***** 420 ***** 26.2

Keywords: grams, heavy, ounces, mass

[Nick]

I don't remember where I found this but here's what I came up with:

Erica Arborea has a janka hardness of about 1000. Which translated into a density of roughly 450kg/m^3

[pierredekat]

I don't remember where I found this but here's what I came up with:

Erica Arborea has a janka hardness of about 1000. Which translated into a density of roughly 450kg/m^3

I'm wondering if that might be the stem wood, rather than the root part of Erica Arborea. Somewhere out there is a paper entitled "Characteristics of Briarwood" by Tsoumis, G.; Kezos, N.; Fanariotou, I.; Voulgaridis, E.; Passialis, C. 1988.

I can't find the paper on the internet, but I did find several references to it, and information regarding it, as follows:

A paper presented at the 18th IUFRO World Congress, Ljubljana, Yugoslavia, Sep. 1986. Briarwood is the wood commonly used in making the bowls of tobacco smoking pipes. It comes from tumour-like outgrowths that develop between the root and stem of Erica arborea and take 40-50 yr to reach commercial size. Material from 30-35-yr-old plants growing in northern Greece was examined with regard to anatomical structure, chemical composition, and the effects of boiling in water and exposure to high temp. Results were compared with those of stem- and rootwood of Erica and [stem]wood of Quercus coccifera, Olea europaea, Dalbergia latifolia and Microberlinia brazzavillensis. The wood anatomy of briarwood was mostly irregular and there were amorphous or crystal inclusions in the cell cavities which give the wood an attractive figure. The fibres were shorter and less regular than those of stemwood. Density and hardness were slightly higher and volumetric shrinkage was higher; directional shrinkage was isometric in briarwood but not in stemwood. The extractives content was 3 times higher in briarwood. Boiling in water (a treatment applied in making pipes) reduced the volumetric shrinkage in briarwood, whereas it increased shrinkage in Olea and Quercus, had no effect on drying rate, resulted in higher dimensional stability and eliminated drying defects. Briarwood was more resistant to high temp. (150 degrees -600 degrees C) than stemwood and most of the other species, a fact that is attributed to its high extractives content.

So apparently the density and hardness of the root are "slightly" higher than the stem, for what that's worth.

Man, if anybody can get their hands on that paper, it sure would be cool if they could post it here on the pipemakers forum.

[Karol]

i'd love to see the toxicity information too! just few days ago i tried to google this out when i was looking for a dust mask

[kbadkar]

Living in Los Angeles with all the toxins in the air and in the water; pesticides, fertilizers on my veggies; mysterious chemicals added to packaged foods; hormones in meat; RHbt in my milk; melamine in my dog's food; microwave reheating with melting plastic containers, etc... briar toxicity and first or second hand tobacco smoke are the least of my concerns. Jeez, just thinking about it stresses me enough to want to light up a bowl... don't make me worry about that too!

[Nick]

I would love to see the paper too. I sent a note to the university the author teaches/taught at. We'll see what response i get.

[pierredekat]

I would love to see the paper too. I sent a note to the university the author teaches/taught at. We'll see what response i get.

Awesome!

And I noticed in my original list of hardwoods that there were some glaring omissions, like cherry and olive, for instance. So I've compiled a little bit longer list of woods from various sources on the internet.

And I've tried to include as many alternative stummel woods as I could remember seeing interest in: mesquite, black walnut, osage, etc.

I also included some woods that I think have a lot of potential as a stummel wood or as decorative insert material: woods like honey locust, mulberry, persimmon, etc.

Wood ....... Density (kgs/m3) ....... Density (lbs/ft3)
Afromosia ....... 705 ....... 44.0
Amboyna ....... 657 ....... 41
Apple ....... 660-830 ....... 41.2-51.8
Ash, black ....... 540 ....... 33.7
Ash, white ....... 670 ....... 41.8
Aspen ....... 420 ....... 26.2
Balsa ....... 170 ....... 10.6
Bamboo (minus air) ....... 790 ....... 49
Beech ....... 721 ....... 45
Birch, British ....... 670 ....... 41.8
Blackwood, African ....... 1201 ....... 75
Blackwood, Australian ....... 657 ....... 41
Bloodwood ....... 1009 ....... 63
Briar Root* ....... 844 ....... 52.7
Cedar, Red ....... 380 ....... 23.7
Chestnut ....... 480 ....... 30
Cocobolo ....... 1089 ....... 68
Cherry ....... 560 ....... 35
Cypress ....... 510 ....... 31.8
Douglas Fir ....... 530 ....... 33.1
Ebony ....... 960-1120 ....... 59.9-70.0
Elm, English ....... 600 ....... 37.5
Elm, Red ....... 575 ....... 35.9
Elm, Rock ....... 815 ....... 50.9
Elm, Wych ....... 690 ....... 43.1
Hackberry ....... 588 ....... 36.7
Hickory ....... 767 ....... 47.9
Holly ....... 610 ....... 38.0
Kingwood ....... 1201 ....... 75
Lacewood ....... 529 ....... 33
Larch ....... 589 ....... 36.8
Lignum Vitae ....... 1280-1370 ....... 79.9
Locust, Black ....... 791 ....... 49.4
Locust, Honey ....... 719 ....... 44.9
Madrone ....... 710 ....... 44.3
Mahogany, Honduras ....... 545 ....... 34.0
Mahogany, African ....... 495-850 ....... 30.9
Makore ....... 625 ....... 39
Maple, Soft ....... 529 ....... 33.0
Maple, Sugar ....... 671 ....... 41.9
Mulberry ....... 708 ....... 44.2
Mesquite ....... 721 ....... 45
Oak, Post ....... 719 ....... 44.9
Oak, Red ....... 671 ....... 41.9
Olive Wood ....... 890 ....... 55.5
Osage Orange ....... 911 ....... 56.9
Padauk ....... 801 ....... 50
Pear ....... 705 ....... 44
Pecan ....... 750 ....... 47
Persimmon ....... 881 ....... 55
Pine, Oregon ....... 530 ....... 33.1
Pine, Red ....... 370-660 ....... 23.1-41.2
Pine, Canadian ....... 350-560 ....... 21.8-34.9
Purpleheart ....... 961 ....... 60
Redwood, American ....... 450 ....... 28.0
Rosewood, Honduras ....... 961 ....... 60
Rosewood, East Indian ....... 849 ....... 53
Sapele ....... 625 ....... 39
Sassafrass ....... 449 ....... 28
Satinwood ....... 977 ....... 61
Snakewood ....... 1297 ....... 81
Spruce, Canadian ....... 450 ....... 28.1
Spruce, Sitka ....... 450 ....... 28.1
Sycamore ....... 625 ....... 39
Teak ....... 630-720 ....... 39.3-44.9
Thuya ....... 689 ....... 43
Walnut, Black ....... 641 ....... 40
Wenge ....... 881 ....... 55
Zebrawood ....... 737 ....... 46
Ziricote ....... 897 ....... 56

* See above.

[mcgregorpipes]

I know this is an old post.. Google found it. it's something I've been researching, I have a pile of various fruit woods I want to dry for stummels. Did anyone ever come across the paper mentioned above?

[wmolaw]

I don't remember where I found this but here's what I came up with:

Erica Arborea has a janka hardness of about 1000. Which translated into a density of roughly 450kg/m^3

I'm wondering if that might be the stem wood, rather than the root part of Erica Arborea. Somewhere out there is a paper entitled "Characteristics of Briarwood" by Tsoumis, G.; Kezos, N.; Fanariotou, I.; Voulgaridis, E.; Passialis, C. 1988.

I can't find the paper on the internet, but I did find several references to it, and information regarding it, as follows:

A paper presented at the 18th IUFRO World Congress, Ljubljana, Yugoslavia, Sep. 1986. Briarwood is the wood commonly used in making the bowls of tobacco smoking pipes. It comes from tumour-like outgrowths that develop between the root and stem of Erica arborea and take 40-50 yr to reach commercial size. Material from 30-35-yr-old plants growing in northern Greece was examined with regard to anatomical structure, chemical composition, and the effects of boiling in water and exposure to high temp. Results were compared with those of stem- and rootwood of Erica and [stem]wood of Quercus coccifera, Olea europaea, Dalbergia latifolia and Microberlinia brazzavillensis. The wood anatomy of briarwood was mostly irregular and there were amorphous or crystal inclusions in the cell cavities which give the wood an attractive figure. The fibres were shorter and less regular than those of stemwood. Density and hardness were slightly higher and volumetric shrinkage was higher; directional shrinkage was isometric in briarwood but not in stemwood. The extractives content was 3 times higher in briarwood. Boiling in water (a treatment applied in making pipes) reduced the volumetric shrinkage in briarwood, whereas it increased shrinkage in Olea and Quercus, had no effect on drying rate, resulted in higher dimensional stability and eliminated drying defects. Briarwood was more resistant to high temp. (150 degrees -600 degrees C) than stemwood and most of the other species, a fact that is attributed to its high extractives content.

So apparently the density and hardness of the root are "slightly" higher than the stem, for what that's worth.

Man, if anybody can get their hands on that paper, it sure would be cool if they could post it here on the pipemakers forum.

Here it is.

http://www.rmperkins.com/RMPerkins/Misc ... fBriar.pdf

[AaronC]

Here's a pretty good list of wood hardness.
http://www.morlanwoodgifts.com/MM011.ASP?pageno=207

[Sasquatch]

I find this endlessly fascinating.

The rmperkins link is fabulous, possibly justifying all the other bullshit on this site!

I find briar from different vendors to be so different in its characteristics that it is almost like a different wood. It's hard to get a real good bead on exactly what you are getting - 10% wetter wood from one vendor might make that wood seem softer, or it might indeed really be softer.

There's a bunch of relations that I don't have my head around exactly - overall density (simply mass/volume), how this relates to grain density/fineness, how either of these items relate to hardness, and how any or all of these features relate to smoking properties... it's fun.

I've sent out enough pipes made from different briar suppliers now and gotten what I think it legitimate feedback, and there are definitely trends in pipe behavior. With 50 bowls worth of cake in the pipe, I don't know if there's still a ton of difference...