A question of language really, is there some logic how to define which wood belongs to what category or is it just custom?
Softwood vs. hardwood?
- Thread starter TLM
- Start date
Hardwood vs Softwood: What’s the Difference?
Explore the key differences between hardwood and softwood. Learn about their unique characteristics, uses, and benefits to make informed choices for your projects.
www.laver.co.uk
Sent from my SM-G970F using Tapatalk
Perhaps you could elaborate on why you are asking here? This is the sort of question that is very well answered by a Google search. If you have done your own search and found the volume of information on the Web isn't adequate, it would be helpful if you could explain why, so no one here wastes time repeating it. 
en.wikipedia.org
Softwood - Wikipedia
Well, I found several references to deciduous trees and then to others but I did not really find any clearcut definition that would be halfway logical to an engineer. There might not be one but Google does not tell that. Also it propably is more a question of language usage than tree taxonomy.
Ah. Well, I think the problem is that you are looking for a definition that is based upon engineering principles, such as hardness, strength, structure. That isn't how it is defined, so looking for an answer in those terms is doomed.
Google "definition of softwood" and you get lots of information. Some of which states that the definition is not about whether the wood is physically hard or soft. It isn't about whether they lose their leaves either, since larch is considered a softwood and holm oak a hardwood. Balsawood is a hardwood. Lots of pines are harder than an awful lot of hardwoods
www.wood-database.com
Google "definition of softwood" and you get lots of information. Some of which states that the definition is not about whether the wood is physically hard or soft. It isn't about whether they lose their leaves either, since larch is considered a softwood and holm oak a hardwood. Balsawood is a hardwood. Lots of pines are harder than an awful lot of hardwoods
Janka Hardness | The Wood Database
www.wood-database.com
I would not be surprised if the terms arose in the UK without reference to the properties of timber elsewhere in the world. Largely speaking the native conifers in the British Isles produce softer wood than the native broad leaf trees.
I would be interested whether other languages have any similar grouping for timber.
I would be interested whether other languages have any similar grouping for timber.
None of the articles I have found so far have any reference to the origin of the word. It is somewhat strange to use the words hard and soft if they do not refer to the hardness or softness of the wood.
Why I asked here is that I assumed somebody would know it straight away, apparently not a clear cut case.
I herd the term also in the US where the amount of species is large and spread of properties also. Finnish has nothing comparable and as far as I know neither Swedish.
Why I asked here is that I assumed somebody would know it straight away, apparently not a clear cut case.
I herd the term also in the US where the amount of species is large and spread of properties also. Finnish has nothing comparable and as far as I know neither Swedish.
Last edited:
The correlation with the microscopic details of wood anatomy is quite clear.
In the "softwoods", water and nutrients are conducted up the trunk in xylem tracheids.
In the "hardwoods," water and nutrients are conducted up the trunk in chains, "vessels," of open, pipe-like cells called vessel elements. The rest of the wood is variously long skinny thick-walled xylem fibers and (eg Balsa) a huge amount of brick-like thin walled parenchyma cells.
The quantities, proportions and the arrangement patterns are as definitive as fingerprints for species. With microscope slides made from stained sections in the radial, tangential and transverse planes, I can identify about 300 species of economic importance in my personal collection.
In the "softwoods", water and nutrients are conducted up the trunk in xylem tracheids.
In the "hardwoods," water and nutrients are conducted up the trunk in chains, "vessels," of open, pipe-like cells called vessel elements. The rest of the wood is variously long skinny thick-walled xylem fibers and (eg Balsa) a huge amount of brick-like thin walled parenchyma cells.
The quantities, proportions and the arrangement patterns are as definitive as fingerprints for species. With microscope slides made from stained sections in the radial, tangential and transverse planes, I can identify about 300 species of economic importance in my personal collection.
I have always thought that softwood = gymnosperms, and hardwood = angiosperms - nothing to do with 'hardness' at all.
Broch: absolutely correct.
I think where the antique semantic difference lies is in the use of hand tools.
Because of the generally greater % of xylem fiber to vessel elements in the angiosperm wood, it's a lot harder to cut with a knife, for example.
The working difference in carving becomes really obvious with the force needed to use gouges in woods like western red cedar and birch.
I think where the antique semantic difference lies is in the use of hand tools.
Because of the generally greater % of xylem fiber to vessel elements in the angiosperm wood, it's a lot harder to cut with a knife, for example.
The working difference in carving becomes really obvious with the force needed to use gouges in woods like western red cedar and birch.
We use in Germany the nearly same words different.
English hard wood is German Laubholz, leave wood
English soft wood is German Nadelholz, needle wood
German Hartholz means Oak, Beech and ash tree but also for example yew tree.
German Weichholz means pine and poplar or our here fast growing birch.
So, if we say hard, we mean hard.
It doesn't matter if we look at steel, stone, wood or whatever.
English hard wood is German Laubholz, leave wood
English soft wood is German Nadelholz, needle wood
German Hartholz means Oak, Beech and ash tree but also for example yew tree.
German Weichholz means pine and poplar or our here fast growing birch.
So, if we say hard, we mean hard.
It doesn't matter if we look at steel, stone, wood or whatever.
Ok it seems that the term might originate in the Misty Isles from relatively limited number of species and hand tool use. Forgetting willows and aspens and larch (can be bloody hard).
I have to admire the artisans capable of building the great oak ships that travelled the world in the spice trade. Hand tools all the way.
Best yet was a water well casing uncovered from 7,000+ years BP.
The oak structure had dovetail corner joints! Spain, maybe? I forget.
The oak structure had dovetail corner joints! Spain, maybe? I forget.
As I have understood the Sutton Hoo ship had basically the same shape as viking ships and a construction method quite close. If I remember right planked wooden boats have been found very much older in many places in northern Europe and as the basic technique of plank splitting was developed I guess ships came readily after that. I don't remember reading how ships were made in the Med.
People were limited by tools and technology not wit. Of course technology cumulation is much slower before written records came to the use.
People were limited by tools and technology not wit. Of course technology cumulation is much slower before written records came to the use.
In the simplest of terms but with the exception of some, hard woods are usually deciduous. meaning they lose their leaves in Autumn or early winter.
soft woods like evergreen pines/conifers are softwoods, meaning they keep the needle like leaves all year
As a rule of thumb.. soft woods for boiling, hard woods for broiling(cooking).
The energy content per mass of wood is fairly constant but energy density (per unit volume) of course is not. Makes sense.
