木材為生態、環保性能優異之建材，但因易燃燒、腐朽、受蟲蝕等問題使其應用範圍受限，而衍生出提升耐燃或防腐性能之木材性質改良處理技術。但木材經處理後是否影響其機械性能尚缺乏基礎資料，故本研究針對目前市場常採用之高壓注入處理方式，選擇兩種經CNS 6532檢驗達耐燃三級且兼具防腐性能之處理方式(塑化處理、防火防腐綜合處理)、三種構造上常用之廉價材種(福州杉、放射松、柳桉木)，探討其經處理後機械性能改變情形。

　　透過文獻整理了解防火、防腐處理類型與對木材之影響，及木材應用於構造上應具備之機械性能與影響因子，經由試驗方法得知經處理材七種機械性能之改變，包括木材縱向拉伸、縱向壓縮、靜曲、剪斷、部份壓縮強度、橫向壓縮彈性係數及釘著力。此外亦針對三種與應用環境相關之物理性質進行試驗，以了解木材吸濕性、吸水性、收縮率之改變情形。試驗結果以敘述統計方式分析，以對照組試驗結果為基準進行比對。研究成果如下：

1.三材種經塑化或防火防腐綜合處理後，機械性能部份提升、部份降低，其變異情形因材種、處理類型而異，因此不適用現有木構造建築物設計及施工技術規範對經防腐處理材之強度折減係數0.8及彈性係數折減係數0.9的規範。

(1)整體而言，塑化處理對三材種之縱向壓縮強度、靜曲強度、部份壓縮強度有提升之效益，但對縱向拉伸強度、釘著力、韌性及剛性有折減。個別特殊影響包括該處理對柳桉木之縱向拉伸強度及剛性、釘著力提升，對放射松之靜曲韌性與剪斷韌性有所提升。除柳桉木外，經塑化處理材縱向拉伸強度與彈性係數折減係數須下修。三材種之靜曲強度彈性係數折減係數均須下修。

(2)整體而言，防火防腐綜合處理對三材種之縱向壓縮強度、部份壓縮強度、釘著力有提升之效益，但對縱向拉伸強度、韌性及剛性有折減。個別特殊影響包括該處理對柳桉木縱向壓縮強度有折減，對放射松之剪斷韌性與縱向壓縮韌性有所提升。三材種之縱向壓縮彈性係數、縱向拉伸強度與彈性係數折減係數均須下修。

2.經塑化處理與防火防腐綜合處理均使三材種破壞型態易發生平行纖維向之劈裂或春秋材交界面脫開、滑移現象。

3.經塑化處理與防火防腐綜合處理均使木材吸濕性、吸水量提高，但收縮率降低，未來若需應用於接水、接地之環境需考慮其含水率上升後之強度值。

4.應用方面，經處理之三材種大多不適用於拉伸構件及對變形敏感之構件，且於設計階段宜加強考慮變形量、潛變及其他耐震吸能構造。

　Wood is a kind of building material that has a high performance in the ecological and environmental protection field. However, its application is also confined because of the ignitability, decay, and insect injuries. Thus, some techniques have been invented to improve the fire-retardant and preservative performance. We still do not know weather these procedures effect the mechanical properties of wood or not due to the lack of basic information. Therefore, this research focuses on those pressure processes used most frequently. By choosing two treatments with not only the incombustibility level three under CNS 6532 test but also preservation ( MPW-15 treatment and FRW+K4 treatment ), three species of economical wood used in construction( China fir, Radiata pine, and Red lauan ), we are able to analyze the difference of the mechanical properties of wood after these treatments.

　Essential mechanical properties and influencing factors of wood used in construction and the effect of the fire-retardant and preservative treatments can be realized through the document retrospection. The experiments in this research lead to some differences of seven mechanical properties: longitudinal tensile strength, longitudinal compressive strength, bending strength, shearing strength, transverse compressive strength, partial compressive strength, and withdrawal resistance. Otherwise, this research also focuses on three physical properties related to applying environment to understand the difference of moisture absorption, water absorption, and shrinkage. The results of these experimental groups are analyzed by statement statistics and compared with the control group .The results of these experiments are:

1. The mechanical properties of these three species of wood had been partially enhanced and partially reduced due to the differences of species and treatments. Hence for the wood under the preservative treatment, the safety factors of strength (0.8)and elasticity modulus(0.9) in the recent building codes are not appropriate here.

(1) In general, MPW-15 treatment enhanced the longitudinal compressive strength, bending strength, and partial compressive strength of these three species. But it also reduced longitudinal tensile strength, withdrawal resistance, toughness, and rigidity. Peculiarly, this treatment enhanced the longitudinal tensile strength and withdrawal resistance of Red lauan. It also enhanced the bending and shearing toughness of the Radidta pine. Except the Red lauan, the safety factor of longitudinal tensile strength and modulus of elasticity should be amended lower. The elasticity modulus of bending strength of these three species should be all amended lower.

(2) In general, FRW+K4 treatment enhanced the longitudinal compressive strength, partial compressive strength, and withdrawal resistance of these three species. But it reduced the longitudinal tensile strength, toughness, and rigidity. Peculiarly, this treatment reduced the longitudinal compressive strength of the Red lauan. It also enhanced the shearing and tensile compression toughness of the Radidta pine. The elasticity modulus of longitudinal compressive strength, longitudinal tensile strength, and the longitudinal tensile elasticity modulus should be all amended lower.

2. Both of these treatments reduced the toughness and rigidity of these three species of wood but enhanced the brittleness. They easily caused the splitting failure parallel to grain or the sliding at the section between earlywood and latewood.

3. Both of these treatments enhanced the moisture and water absorption but reduced the shrinkage of these three species of wood. In the future, the difference of strength under the increase of water containment should be taken into consideration when the wood is used in humid environments.

4. It is inappropriate for these three species of wood under the fire-retardant and preservative treatments to be used in the tensile structure members and those fail easily under deformation. Furthermore, deformation, creep, and earthquake absorption should also be taken into account in the structure design.

一、中文文獻
專著類
C-01國立編譯館、王松永《木材物理學》，徐氏基金會，1993
C-02 王松永《商用木材》，1985再版，中華民國林產事業協會
C-03周耀鑾、黃依典《建築材料學》，1981再版，科教圖書出版社
C-04 王櫻茂，《材料科學》，1972，三民書局有限公司
C-05 Lawrence H. Van原著，陳皇鈞、熊京國譯，《基礎材料科學與工程》，1988再版，曉園出版社有限公司
C-06 蔡如藩《木材力學性質》，1985，徐氏基金會
C-07 哈重福編《木材的結構與設計》，1987，明文書局
C-08 王松永《木質環境科學》，2003，國立編譯館
C-09 陳陵援譯《木材的乾燥》，1992，徐氏基金會
C-10 曾逸仁《台灣古蹟大木構件破壞類型及其非破壞檢測法之探索》，1997，成功大學碩論
C-11 莊鴻濱《耐燃藥劑的分布與吸收量對木材耐燃性能與強度性質的影響》，2000，台大森林學研究所博論

期刊類
M-01康志暉改寫〈防火木材製造〉，《化工技術雜誌2：3》，PP45~47，1977.05
M-02〈木材防火〉，《工業技術∕12》，PP52~53，1975.02
M-03黃金城、林翰謙〈木材防火處理〉，《塗料與塗裝技術86》，PP39~55，2001.03
M-04饒玉珍〈木材防腐劑國家標準訂定之現況〉，《標準與檢驗雜誌55》，PP10~16，2003.07
M-05王松永〈木材之天然耐朽性及其防止處理〉，《林產工業 / 17》，PP219~234，1998
M-06陳安利〈影響木質構造建築耐久性之因素〉，《臺灣建築報導雜誌∕41》，PP60~61，1999.02
M-07王松永〈木質材料之機能性及其改善處理效能研究〉，《科學發展月刊 / 23卷-1》PP12~16，1995.01
M-08蔡金木、王越琳、蘇文瑜〈防火藥劑處理對木材耐燃性之改善效應〉，《林產工業 / 11》，PP99~112，1992
M-09莊鴻濱、王松永、林法勤〈耐燃藥劑吸收量與加速裂化處理對木材機械性質之影響〉，《林產工業 / 18》，PP443~454，1999
M-10郭文法〈高分子防火材料在室內裝潢上的應用〉，《工業材料 / 113》，PP101~109，1996

其他類
O-01《木構造建築物設計及施工技術規範》，2003.05.01內政部修正

二、英文文獻
E-01 L. Brancheriau, H. Bailleres,D. Guitard，〈Comparison between modulus of elasticity values calculated using 3 and 4 point bending tests on wooden samples〉，《Wood Science and Technology Volume 36, Number 5》，2002.11，PP367 ~ 383。