Timber Rivet Connections

Timber Rivet
Connections The
Design Process
Revealed
Robert J . Taylor, PhD, P.Eng., Assoc.AIA*
David M. Moses, PhD, P.Eng., PE, LEED
AP**

* Director, Technology Transfer, American Forest &
Paper Association / American Wood Council,
Washington, DC
** Structural Engineer, EquilibriumConsulting Inc,
Vancouver and Toronto, Canada

INTRODUCTION
Timber rivet connections have been used
successfully in many structures over the past 30 years. They are part of the US
1
and Canadian
2
structural wood
design codes, but unfortunately, there are few published design examples to aid designers
3,4,5,6
. This paper is
targeted to the connection designer and provides a short summary of the 2005 NDS
design process for timber rivet

connections along with comments on design issues of common interest.

Features and Installation
In essence, timber rivet connections can be characterized as large,
thick truss plates. The hole diameter and the dimensions of the rivet
head are important factors required to develop "head fixity." Some
rivets with small heads may not develop this characteristic. The
tensile strength of the rivets themselves is also very important and
manufacturers of rivets must pay attention to this (not necessarily the
connection designers). Dimensional details of the rivet system using
specially shaped steel nails installed in a perforated steel plate are
described in the 2005 NDS
1
, Appendix M.

Timber rivets have a unique installation procedure that is noted in
CSA O86 and further explained in its Commentary: Timber rivets at the perimeter of the group shall be driven
first. Successive timber rivets should be driven in a spiral pattern from the outside to the centre of the group. In
Dr. Madsens book Behaviour of Timber Connections
7
, he describes the original line of reasoning behind this
procedure:
"The 'oval' cross section of the rivet with its long dimension placed parallel with the grain (even when the
load is perpendicular to the grain) does not cut the fibres, but pushes the fibres to each side as the rivet is
driven into place...the fibres between two [adjacent] rivets are compacted initially by about 25%..." i.e. the
fibres are compressed by the rivets "creating 'friction' between fibres and the rivets, in addition to the usual
nail action." [There is a] very strong interaction between the steel plate and the fibres contained within
the perimeter of the rivet group and to a depth equal to the rivet penetration. At the same time, the pre-
stressed fibres will not be able to create splitting in the glulam; on the contrary, it prevents splitting from
occuring. The rivets create a plug of wood which is reinforced and firmly integrated with the steel plate."
Dr. Madsen describes the fixity of the rivet head as a result of deforming the head when the rivets are
driven: "...when the conical head is driven into the steel plate [the] hole becomes deformed and...keeps the
rivet in that position. The rivet is now acting as a fully fixed cantilever beam reaching into the wood fibres.
Clearly, the state of stress in a rivet connection is quite complex and the design procedures presented in the design
codes are meant to simplify the analysis for day-to-day use.

Timber Rivet Connections - The Design Process Revealed 1

Connection Strength
The main advantage of using timber rivets lies in their
ability to develop very high loads compared to other
conventional connectors in timber. As of this writing, the
2005 NDS limits the installation of timber rivets only into
Douglas Fir-Larch or Southern Pine glued laminated
timber (manufactured in accordance with ANSI/AITC
A190.1), whereas CAN/CSA-O86-01 permits rivet installation into other common structural wood products through
the use of a listed factor, H (10.7.2.2) applied to the factored lateral strength resistance of a connection loaded either
parallel or perpendicular to grain.

Test data
8,9,10
and rationale used for developing the CSA O86
provisions for timber rivets installed in solid sawn material showed
that timber rivet capacity for Douglas Fir-Larch glulam and
Douglas Fir-Larch solid sawn lumber were comparable. The test
failure modes were rivet yielding, but concern had been expressed
that wood checks and splits are more prevalent in solid sawn
material than glulam. So, although the test results were
comparable, the H factor for solid sawn stated in the code is 50%
of the H factor for glulam to allow for checks and splits in solid
sawn.

Designers often ask: does it matter which wood surface the timber
connection is installed in? From the research
3,7,8,9,10,11,12
, there
does not appear to be much difference in lateral load design
capacity between face surface installations (surfaces 1 and 2 in
Figure 1) in parallel and perpendicular to the grain directions for
timber rivet connections. Differences between surface 1 and 2
capacities are small in rivet yielding, but maybe more so for wood
failure modes between each surface particularly in the
perpendicular to grain direction. For design, these differences are
small enough that installations in surfaces 1 and 2 can be treated
the same. However, end grain (surface 3) installation design capacity is considerably lowered per NDS 13.2.5 and
O86 10.7.2.7, roughly half of the perpendicular-to-grain surface 1 or 2 value for a 90 degree cut.

Timber rivet connections, originally developed for use with glulam construction, may be a viable option for use with
structural composite lumber (SCL) products. Tests
13
have been conducted on small samples to assess the
performance and predictability of timber rivet connections in parallel strand lumber (PSL) and laminated strand
lumber (LSL). The test joint configurations were designed to exhibit rivet failures in some combination of rivet yield
and bearing deformation in the composite as opposed to brittle wood failure modes, such as block-shear tear-out or
splitting. Results suggest that per-rivet design values should fall between 225 to 450 lbs (1 and 2 kN), depending on
species and density of the composite and load direction with respect to grain of the composite strands. Timber rivets
performed better in LSL than in PSL and better in yellow poplar PSL than in Douglas-fir or Southern Pine PSL; 1
inch (40-mm) rivets in yellow poplar LSL gave roughly equivalent performance to 2 inch (65-mm) rivets in
yellow poplar PSL. Comparing rivet yield predictions following the National Design Specification recommendations
for round nails and the much simpler approach of using 2/3 the maximum load suggests that the latter approach
provides a more consistently reliable evaluation of yield strength for timber rivets. Rivets in SCL are not currently
addressed by the design codes. Additional study is still necessary to assess rivet connection performance in SCL
when rivet density exceeds one rivet per square inch.

Moisture Issues
Designers are often concerned about cross-grain movement of wood due to moisture changes, especially with
respect to timber connections using wide side plates, or where fasteners are designed as large groups on a common
plate. There is a belief that timber rivets on wide plates can accommodate wood cross-grain shrinkage / expansion
Douglas Fir-Larch glulam 1.0
Spruce-Lodgepole Pine J ack Pine glulam 0.80
Douglas Fir-Larch sawn timber 0.50
Hem-Fir sawn timber 0.45
Spruce-Pine-Fir sawn timber 0.40
Northern Species sawn timber 0.35
Figure 1 Glulam Surfaces
CAN/CSA-O86-01(10.7.2.2) H Factor
due to MC change without inducing tension perpendicular stresses in the wood fiber around the rivet shanks;
however, it is still a matter of the degree of MC change in the wood, and the scale of the rivets, plate(s), and cross-
grain dimension of wood member relative to each other. Standard connection practice is to never use a single steel
splice plate on connections where the distance between outer rows of dowel connectors is greater than 5" (NDS
Figure 11H). CSA O86 Clause 10.7.1.10 states, For wet fabrication conditions in sawn lumber, the maximum
dimension perpendicular to grain over which a rivet group spans shall not exceed 200 mm (8 inches). This
accounts for shrinkage in the long term to prevent splitting, i.e., the timber shrinks but the steel plate does not, and
tension perpendicular to grain develops which may result in splitting.

Timber rivets, on the other hand (as opposed to dowel-type connectors), have been tested and modeled for the group
sizes indicated in the code tables. These tables in the NDS and O86 limit the size of the rivet groups and were
developed using analytical models confirmed with testing for groups within that range (see references). In terms of
addressing the shrinkage/splitting concern with the drying of wet lumber, there were tests
5
that looked at various
environmental conditions. However, glulam is made from kiln-dried material and should be much more stable than
solid sawn, non-kiln-dried material. It would, therefore, be prudent, as a connection designer to keep this in mind
when designing large groups of rivets, i.e. the material being specified, the anticipated service conditions, and the
distance between the outermost rows of rivets on a common plate. Introducing more plates separated across the
wood grain could alleviate this concern. In practice, however, the authors have never run into this issue as a
problem.

Good practice is to always hot-dip galvanize metal components for corrosive or exposed environments and in
situations where the structure may be exposed to the elements for long-construction periods that might otherwise
result in streaking stains on the wood that can be very difficult to remove (unsightly if the final structure is meant to
be exposed for aesthetics). The 2005 NDS specifies timber rivets made of mild steel (AISI 1035), and plates of A36
steel. Further, design provisions and values of the 2005 NDS are applicable only to timber rivets that are hot-dipped
galvanized to ASTM A153. Plates also need to be hot-dipped galvanized to ASTM A153 if the connection is in wet
service. This is all described in 2005 NDS 13.1.1.

Moment Resisting Applications
Timber rivet connections work best when the plate of rivets is loaded in one direction as a group. The system was
never intended to be used to resist a twisting moment applied in the plane of the plate. Madsen
7
contends that a
circular arrangement of rivets for such moment connections might make an interesting research problem, however,
based on engineering experience, and the likely development of undesirable tension stresses perpendicular-to-
grain
14
, in-plane moment connections using timber rivets would not be recommended. Instead, designers can use
other strategies to transfer moment, one of which is exemplified later in this paper.

Seismic Connections
Regarding seismic performance, obviously ductility can be enforced in the design of rivet connections by designing
for rivet failure as the governing mode (i.e. ductile, as opposed to brittle wood failure). Dr. Marjan Popovski at
FPInnovations (formerly Forintek Western Laboratory) contends that timber riveted connections are definitely one
of the best connections to be used in earthquake prone areas. As proof, he has conducted exhaustive tests, including
shake table tests, the results of which have been published
15,16
. In earthquake prone areas, timber rivet connections
should be designed to fail in rivet yielding in order for the structure to achieve the required connection ductility.
Wood failure (brittle mode governing) should be avoided at any cost.

An improved way to enforce connection ductility is to move the ductile zone out of the rivets into the steel plates.
There is far superior confidence in the ability to predict ductile behavior in structural steel, so if the steel plates are
designed as the weak link, i.e. the fuse or energy-dissipating element of the connection, one can control and
predict the ductility of the connection prior to approaching the capacity of the rivet connection in the wood. Here is
an illustrative example: picture a splice between 2 pieces of wood where the steel side plates are riveted to both
sides of each piece, but the steel plates are short and not continuous between wood members. Instead, use steel bolts
A325 or similar to bolt the steel plates together with steel splice plates - essentially a steel-steel connection. Other
configurations are possible too, essentially moving the weak link into the steel plates where one can more accurately
predict behavior.

DESIGN PROCESS
The design process for timber rivets is illustrated through three worked
examples of typical connections using allowable stress design (ASD) and load
resistance factor design (LRFD).

Essentially, there are four strength limit states to a timber rivet connection;
two parallel-to-wood-grain (P-direction), and two perpendicular-to-wood
grain (Q-direction). For each grain direction either the rivet yields and fails,
or the wood fiber fails. If the load is applied only in the P-direction, or only
in the Q-direction, then the number of strength limit states to check reduces to
two: rivet yielding, and wood fiber failure. The lower strength will govern
the design. The perforated plate is stiff and, although rarely an issue, should
also be checked using appropriate steel code provisions
17,18
. Although as mentioned previously, this potential limit
state in the plates tensile capacity could be added to the above states should one wish to assure connection ductility.

The design process is simple, regardless whether ASD or LRFD is used, and is best implemented using a
spreadsheet, or other calculation software because of its recursive nature:

Determine total loads that must be resisted (demand)

Assume a trial design based on connection configuration geometry that will accommodate a grid of rivets,
minding tabulated minimum edge and end distances. The main variables here are: plate thickness, rivet
length, rivet spacing parallel to wood grain, number of rows of rivets, and number of rivets in each row.

Check rivet yield failure an equation is given for this based on the capacity of a single rivet through a
single plate. There are two equations: one each for the P and Q directions respectively (NDS 13.2-1 and
13.2-2).

Check wood failure parallel-to-grain (P-direction) from a table based on rivets installed on faces of the
connection. The tables are organized by rivet length and by plate thickness for typical rivet grid spacings.
Footnotes to the table offer explanations of member width. The tables simplify the design process
tremendously and allow the designer to avoid using the complex equations for predicting wood failure in
shear or tension. The equations were originally developed and verified by tests
8
. For details on these
equations, see the 2005 NDS Commentary.

NDS Tables 13.2.1A 13.2.1F are for connections with steel side plates on opposite sides of the wood
member. The reference design value in the table is for the capacity of one side plate with associated
rivets (NDS C13.2.1). Thus for a connection with plates on opposing faces, the designer would double the
table value to determine the reference capacity of the connection. For connections with a single plate of
rivets on one side of the wood member, the designer enters the table with twice the thickness of the wood
member to get the correct reference capacity for a single-sided connection.

Check wood failure perpendicular-to-grain (Q-direction) an equation (NDS 13.2-3) is given for this based
on the capacity of a single rivet through a single plate. The equation references two tables: one for the
reference value (NDS Table 13.2.2A) based on one plate with rivets installed in one side face of the
connection, and another for the Geometry Factor, C
, (NDS Table 13.2.2B). Again, the reference design

value obtained from the equation is doubled for connections having two side plates.

The lowest capacity of four failure checks above will govern the capacity of the connection. If rivet yield
governs, then ductility of the connection is assured. If wood failure controls, the connection is likely to be
less ductile.

Adjust the determined capacity for site environmental conditions using adjustment factors.

Calculate the demand:capacity ratio a value less than 1.0 is safe. If the ratio is greater than 1.0, try adding
more rivets and repeat the trial design. Off the table for number of rivets? Try increasing the rivet spacing
parallel-to-grain and move to another table. No good? Try increasing the plate thickness. Still not enough?
Try increasing the rivet length in increments to the maximum penetration permitted by the connection
geometry, and repeat the trial.

A handy flowchart in Figure 2 is helpful to illustrate the flow of the design process as referenced to the 2005 NDS.
In short order, mastery of the process can be obtained.

DESIGN EXAMPLES
To illustrate the design process, a series of examples is provided. Each example is worked in both ASD and LRFD
and is based on the 2005 NDS timber rivet provisions found in Chapter 13. Each
solution has been developed using Mathcad
software by Parametric Technology

Corporation
(PTC
). Therefore, formatting of certain variables and equations as

shown in the examples are unique to this software.
Example 1 Tension Splice
For the first example in Figure 3, consider a simple tension splice loaded in the
wood parallel-to-grain direction (P), with rivet plates installed on opposing wood
faces. Here, three strength limit states are of interest: rivet strength, parallel-to-
grain wood strength, and tensile strength of the perforated connecting plate.
Example 2 Hanger Connection
For the second example in Figure 4, consider a beam-to-girder hanger connection,
with the hanger installed with rivets to one wood face of the girder and loaded in
the girder perpendicular-to-grain direction. Here, two strength limit states are of
interest: rivet strength, and perpendicular-to-grain wood strength. The hanger is
assumed to be structurally adequate. In the example, three trials are run. The first
trial with the wood failure governing does not work, however the second trial
where rivet failure governs does work simply by adding more rivets and providing
desirable connection ductility in the bargain. The third trial shows a way of
preserving the desired rivet yielding mode with fewer rivets, by relocating the rivet
array closer to the top face of the girder.
Example 3 Moment Connection
For the third example in Figure 5, consider a
three-pinned Douglas Fir glulam arch spanning
300 feet. Each half of the arch needs to be
spliced at its midpoint for shipping, and the
moment splice needs to be designed for wind
uplift. Here, axial and shear loads are ignored for
illustration of the design process but would be
required in reality. The splice connection uses a
single rivet plate at the top and bottom of the
member and opposing plates on the sides of the
member to develop the tension force across the
splice due to the moment. This strategy would
keep tension-perpendicular stresses to a
minimum.

The design is done in two steps:
- Step 1: design of the top rivet plate to take most of the moment
- Step 2: design of side rivet plates to take the remaining moment
Additional steps to complete the design are not shown here. These steps include design of split rings or shear keys
to resist shear, as well as checking of plate thicknesses, net section, and addition of plate stiffeners as required.
Checking rivet group block pull-out failure of the wood member, or other known local stress effects due to the
Photo credit: R. Malczyk, Equilibrium Consulting Inc.
rivets, is not needed since these failure modes were included in the generation of the 2005 NDS timber rivet table
values see 2005 NDS E.1.1 for information.

SUMMARY
Timber rivets are a versatile means of making large scale timber connections functionally and aesthetically possible.
The design of timber rivet connections using current code references is presented in a manner that the designer can
easily follow. Examples from real life are provided to illustrate the process and to aid the designer in this task.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Gratitude is expressed to the many contributors during the discussion and development of this paper, including: Erol
Karacabeyli (FPInnovations/Forintek), Marjan Popovski (FPInnovations/Forintek), Bruce Craig (Weyerhaeuser),
Doug Rammer (USDA Forest Products Laboratory), J eff Linville (AITC), Phil Line (AF&PA / AWC), and Robert
Malczyk (Equilibrium Consulting Inc.) who provided the basis for the moment connection example (Example 3).
The authors wish to acknowledge the work of the inventor of the timber rivet, Dr. Borg Madsen, on whose work
many others have since contributed to the design and implementation of the timber rivet connection. Today, the
timber rivet is gaining widespread use as an effective and versatile timber connector.
DISCLAIMER
It is intended that this paper be used in conjunction with competent engineering design. The authors, AF&PA, and
Equilibrium Consulting Inc. assume no responsibility for errors and/or omissions in this paper, nor for any
engineering designs, plans, or construction prepared from it.

REFERENCES

1. ANSI / AF&PA NDS-2005, National Design Specification
(NDS
) for Wood Construction, 2005

Edition, American Forest & Paper Association, Washington, DC.

2. CAN/CSA-O86-01, Engineering Design in Wood (Limit States Design), Canadian Standards
Association, Rexdale (Toronto), ON, Canada.

3. Foschi, R.O.; Longworth, J . (1975): Analysis and Design of Griplam Nailed Connections, Journal of the
Structural Engineering Division, American Society of Civil Engineers, 101(ST 12): 2537-2555.

4. Fox, S.P. (1979): Connection Capacity of New Griplam Nails, Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering,
NRCC, 6(1):59-64.

5. Stahl, D.C.; Begel, M.; Wolfe, R.W. (2000): Simplified Analysis of Timber Rivet Connections, Proceedings
of World Conference on Timber Engineering 2000, Whistler Resort, BC, Canada, J ul 31 Aug 3, 2000.

6. Williams, C.C. (2006): Timber Rivets, Structure
magazine, NCSEA / CASE / SEI, Copper Creek

publishers, Reedsburg, WI, 13(3):26-27.

7. Madsen, B. (2000): Behaviour of Timber Connections, Timber Engineering Ltd., North Vancouver, BC,
ISBN 1-55056-738-1. 430 p.

8. Karacabeyli, E., Foschi, R.O. (1987): Glulam rivet connections under eccentric loading, Canadian
Journal of Civil Engineering, NRCC, 14( ):621-630.

9. Karacabeyli, E.; Fraser, H. (1990): Short-term strength of glulam rivet connections made with spruce and
Douglas-fir glulam and Douglas-fir solid timber. Canadian. Journal of Civil Engineering, 17(2):166-
172.

10. Karacabeyli, E.; Fraser, H.; Deacon, W. (1998): Lateral and Withdrawal Load Resistance of Glulam Rivet
Connections Made with Sawn Timber, Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, (25):128-138.

11. McGowan, W.M. & Madsen, B. (1965): A Rigid Field Joint for Glued-Laminated Construction,
Cooperative Study Report by the Forest Products Laboratory, Vancouver, and Research Committee of the
Canadian Institute of Timber Construction, Vancouver: Forest Products Laboratory.

12. Foschi, R.O., Folz, B.R., Yao, F.Z. (1989): Reliability-based Design of Wood Structures, Structural
Research Series, Report No. 34, Department of Civil Engineering, University of British Columbia, 282 p.

13. Wolfe, R. W.; Begel, M.; Craig, B. (2004): Timber Rivets in Structural Composite Lumber, General
Technical. Report FPL-GTR-153, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Forest Products
Laboratory, Madison, WI, 9 p.

14. Hampson, J .A.; Prion, H.G.L.; Lam, F. (2003) : The Effect of End Distance on the Moment Resistance of
Timber Rivet Connections, Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, NRCC, (30):945-948.

15. Popovski, M.; Prion, H.G.L.; Karacabeyli, E. (2002): Seismic Performance of Connections in Heavy
Timber Construction, Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, 29(2002): 289-399.

16. Popovski, M.; Karacabeyli, E. (2004): Seismic Performance of Riveted Connections in Heavy Timber
Construction, Paper No. 3356, Proceedings 13
th
World Conference on Earthquake Engineering,
Vancouver, BC, August 1-6, 2004.

17. AISC (1989): ASD Manual of Steel Construction, 9
th
Edition, American Institute of Steel Construction,
Inc., Chicago, IL.

18. AISC (1998): LRFD Manual of Steel Construction, 2
nd
Edition, American Institute of Steel Construction,
Inc., Chicago, IL.

19. http://www.timsys.com/html/pricing.html Canadian and US primary source of timber rivets.


Determine: Rivet Grain Capacity
(13.2-2) Q
r
=160 p
0.32
n
R
n
C

Determine: Wood Grain Capacity
(13.2-3) Q
w
=q
w
p
0.8
C

Table 13.2.2A q
w
Table 13.2.2B C

Determine: Lowest Governing Capacity in each direction
Min (P
w
, Q
w
) and Min (P
r
, Q
r
)
Apply: Strength Adjustment Factors for Site Conditions
to Min (P
w
, Q
w
, P
r
, Q
r
) to get P and Q

Table 10.3.1 Footnotes 4, 5, 6
(10.3.2); Table 2.3.2; Appendix B C
D

Table 10.3.3 C
M

Table 10.3.4 C
t

Table 13.2.3 C
st

(10.3.7; N.3.1); Table N1 K
F

(10.3.8; N.3.2); Table N2
z

(10.3.9; N.3.3); Table N3
Number of Plates n
P

Adjust as needed:
Plate Thickness t
s

Rivet Length (calc penetration 13.2.1) p
Rivet Spacing || Grain s
p
Row Spacing Grain s
q

Number of Rivets in Each Row n
C

Number of Rows n
R
Determine: Demand / Capacity Ratio
N / N
Demand / Capacity
1.0
Stop
N
Y
Load
Perpendicular to
Wood Grain
Q
Y
N
Start
Determine: Demand Loads; resolve to || and grain directions
(13.2-4) N, P, Q
Determine: Minimum Edge / End Distances
Table 13.3.2 a
p
, a
q
, e
p
, e
q

Choose:
Plate Thickness t
s

Rivet Length (calc penetration 13.2.1) p
Rivet Spacing || Grain s
p
Row Spacing Grain s
q

Number of Rivets in Each Row n
C

Number of Rows n
R

Load Parallel to
Wood Grain
P
Determine: Rivet || Grain Capacity
(13.2-1) P
r
=280 p
0.32
n
R
n
C

Determine: Wood || Grain Capacity
Table 13.2.1A-F P
w
Y
N
Determine: Capacity Loads; resolve from || and
grain directions
(13.2-4) N, P, Q
Figure 2: Timber Rivet Design Process Flowchart (referenced to 2005 NDS)
C
M
0.8 := Wet service (Table 10.3.3)
C
t
1.0 := Less than 100 deg F (Table 10.3.4)
C
st
0.90 := 3/16" steel plate (Table 13.2.3)
C
=N/A (Table 13.2.2B and Table 10.3.1 Footnote 6)

Demand ASD LRFD
D 4400lbf :=
S 13200lbf :=
T D S + := T
f
1.2 D 1.6 S + :=
T 17600lbf = T
f
26400lbf =
Figure 3
Example 1: Timber Rivets - ASD & LRFD
Determine the number of rivets required for the wet service tension splice shown below. The glulam
members are 3"x9" Southern Pine. The tensile force is due to dead plus snow load. Use 1-1/2" rivets
and 3/16" steel side plates, and the 2005 NDS provisions. Note that the designer must also check
member capacity and rivet plate capacity.
Wood: b 3in := Rivet/Plate: l
r
1.5in :=
d 9in := t
p
0.1875in :=
h
p
9in
32
:= Hole diameter
n
p
2 := Number of plates
Modification factors (Table 10.3.1):
C
D
1.15 := Load Duration / Time Effect
(ASD - Table 2.3.2, LRFD - Table N3)
Snow Load
0.8 :=
z
0.65 :=
K
F
2.16
z
:= K
F
3.323 =
continued
p 1.187 =
n
R
8 =
n
c
10 :=
P
r
280 p
0.32
n
R
n
c
lbf := P
r
23666.322lbf = 2005 NDS (13.2-1)
Take the minimum of wood or rivet capacity:
P min P
w
P
r
, ( ) := P 21390lbf = Wood controls
Adjust to conditions with wood capacity governing:
n
p
2 = number of plates
P' P n
p
C
M
C
t
:= 2005 NDS (13.2.1) +Table 10.3.1
ASD LRFD
C
D
P' 39357.6lbf =
z
K
F
P' 59139.072lbf = OK
Capacity
Locate connection area - check end and edge distances from 13.3.2
a
p
3in := End distance
e
p
1in := Rivet-to-wood edge distance
e
ps
0.5in := Rivet-to-steel edge distance (Appendix M)
Determine the maximum number of rows with spacing: s
q
1in :=
n
R
d 2 e
p

s
q
1 + := n
R
8 =
Try 8 rows of 10 rivets each side, spaced at 1" parallel to grain.
Wood - From Table 13.2.1A (Table P
w
values are "per plate" each side; will need to double
table value for total capacity of the connection - do it after determining which capacity controls):
s
p
1in :=
b 3in = member thickness
P
w
21390lbf :=
Rivet - Equation 13.2-1 (P
r
is "per plate", also will need to double table value for total capacity
of the connection - do it after determining which capacity controls)
penetration =rivet length - plate thickness - 1/8"
p
l
r
t
p
0.125in ( )
in
:=
continued
< 1.0 OK
T
f
P
r
0.543 =
f
t
F
t
0.543 =
F
t
21.6ksi = F
t
0.6 F
y
:=
P
r
48.6kips = P
r
F
y
A
g
:= f
t
11.733ksi = f
t
T
A
g
:=
LRFD (D1-1) ASD ASD (D1)
A
g
1.5in
2
= A
g
t
p
b
p
:=
Gross Area Check - Yielding
v
0.75 := 0.9 := LRFD ASD
b
p
8in := Plate width:
F
u
60ksi :=
F
y
36ksi := Plate material - Steel:
Plate - check plate for yield in tension in the various modes. We will use AISC's Manual of
Steel Construction provisions to do this (ASD 9th Edition; LRFD 2nd Edition).
< 1.0 OK
T
f

z
K
F
P' ( )
0.446 =
T
C
D
P' ( )
0.447 =
Demand - Capacity Ratios
continued
Additional check to do:
- member tension capacity
< 1.0 OK
T
f
P
r
0.573 =
T
F
t
0.573 =
P
r
46.09kips = F
t
30.727kips =
P
r

v
0.6 F
u
A
nv

v
F
u
A
nt
+ := F
t
0.3 F
u
A
nv
0.5 F
u
A
nt
+ :=
LRFD (J 4-3a) ASD ASD (J 4)
A
nt
0.943in
2
= A
nt
t
p
b
p
2 e
ps
( ) n
R
1 ( ) h
p

:=
A
nv
0.135in
2
= A
nv
2 t
p
e
ps
0.5 h
p
( ) :=
Net Section Check 1 - Tension Fracture
A
e
t
p
b
p
h
p
n
R
( ) := A
e
1.078in
2
=
ASD (J 4) ASD LRFD (D1-2)
f
t
T
A
e
:= f
t
16.325ksi = P
r

v
F
u
A
e
:= P
r
48.516kips =
F
t
0.5 F
u
:= F
t
30ksi =
f
t
F
t
0.544 =
T
f
P
r
0.544 = < 1.0 OK
Net Section Check 2 - Block Shear Fracture
end
Figure 4
Example 2: Timber Rivets - ASD & LRFD
Design the beam hanger connection shown using timber rivets. The glulam beam and girder are
untreated Douglas Fir glulam. The factored beam reaction is due to dead plus snow loads, and service
conditions are wet. Use 2-1/2 inch rivets and 1/4" plate, and 2005 NDS provisions. Note that the
designer must also confirm the bearing area for the roof beam support, and consider possible uplift
conditions in the design of this connection.
continued
R D S + := R
f
1.2D 1.6S + :=
R 5995lbf = R
f
8992lbf =
Capacity
Assume two rows in each plate, each side of hanger: s
p
1in :=
n
R
2 :=
Trial 1 - Try 8 rivets each row, spaced at 1"
perpendicular to grain.
s
q
1in :=
n
c
8 :=
Wood - From Table 13.2.2A (load on wood is perpendicular to grain):
q
w
1173lbf :=
Locate connection and check end and edge distances from Table 13.3.2
n
R
2 = a
p
3in := End distance parallel to grain
a
q
2in := End distance perp to grain
e
p
1in := Rivet-to-unloaded wood edge distance
e
ps
e
q
2in := Rivet-to-loaded wood edge distance
Wood: b
beam
5.125in := Rivet/Plate: l
r
2.5in :=
d
beam
13.5in := t
p
0.25in :=
n
p
2 := (treat hanger face as two
plates, separated by carried
beam)
C
D
Snow Load
0.8 :=
z
0.65 :=
K
F
2.16
z
:= K
F
3.323 =
C
M
C
t
C
st
1.0 := 0.25" steel plate (Table 13.2.3)
Demand ASD LRFD
D 1500lbf :=
S 4495lbf :=
continued
Q 2829.822lbf = Wood controls
Adjust to conditions with wood capacity governing (Table 10.3.1, Footnotes 4 and 6):
n
p
Q' Q n
p
C
M
C
t
:=
ASD LRFD
Q' C
D
5206.872lbf =
z
K
F
Q' 7823.891lbf =
Demand - Capacity Ratios (Trial 1)
R
Q' C
D
( )
1.151 =
R
f

z
K
F
Q' ( )
1.149 = > 1.0 NG
Try again - increase to 10 rivets per row
Trial 2 - Try 10 rivets each row, spaced
at 1" perpendicular to grain.
s
q
1in :=
n
c
10 :=
We choose to locate the rivet group into the girder near the center of the girder face, thus:
e
p
d
beam
e
ps
s
q
n
c
1 ( ) := e
p
6in =
e
p
n
c
1 ( ) s
q
0.857 =
C
1.32 := (Table 13.2.2B interpolated)

p
l
r
t
p
0.125in ( )
in
:= p 2.125 =
Q
w
q
w
p
0.8
C
:= Q
w
2829.822lbf = 2005 NDS (13.2-3)
Rivet - from Equation 13.2-2
Q
r
160 p
0.32
n
R
n
c
lbf := Q
r
3258.328lbf = 2005 NDS (13.2-2)
Q min Q
w
Q
r
, ( ) :=
continued

z
K
F
Q' 11260.782lbf = Q' 6516.656lbf =
LRFD ASD
Q' Q n
p
C
M
C
t
C
st
:=
number of plates n
p
2 =
Adjust to conditions with rivet capacity governing (Table 10.3.1, Footnotes 4 and 5). Note that C
D
drops
out of the ASD capacity when rivet yield controls (Footnote 4), yet remains on the LRFD side. For
LRFD, the time effect factor, , applies to P
r
and Q
r
since the format conversion factor, K
F
, for
connections adjusts from a 10-year to a 10-minute load basis. C
D
does not apply for ASD values of P
r
and
Q
r
(Footnote 4) because "rivet bending capacity" was treated as a steel limit state in early research and
implementation. The early assumption was that rivet bending capacity is unaffected by load duration.
Load duration effects were specifically considered in checks of wood strength limit states, not steel
strength limit states.
Rivet controls Q 4072.91lbf = Q min Q
w
Q
r
, ( ) :=
2005 NDS (13.2-2) Q
r
4072.91lbf = Q
r
160 p
0.32
n
R
n
c
lbf :=
Rivet - Equation 13.2-2
2005 NDS (13.2-3) Q
w
8792.157lbf = Q
w
q
w
p
0.8
C
:=
p 2.125 = p
l
r
t
p
0.125in ( )
in
:=
(Table 13.2.2B interpolated) C
3.65 :=
e
p
n
c
1 ( ) s
q
0.444 =
e
p
4in = e
p
d
beam
e
ps
s
q
n
c
1 ( ) :=
Rivet to steel edge distance e
ps
0.5in :=
q
w
1318lbf :=
Wood - From Table 13.2.2A:
continued
R
Q' ( )
0.92 =
R
f

z
K
F
Q' ( )
0.799 = < 1.0 OK
Tentative Solution
Refinement
To reduce tension perpendicular stresses from connectors placed in the middle of the side of the
girder, just as for larger fasteners, it is good practice to "hang" the load from the top of the girder.
This has additional benefits in terms of the number of rivets required, and ductility. We proceed with
relocating the girder rivets closer to the top of the girder as shown below.
continued
R
f
8992lbf = R 5995lbf =
R
f
1.2D 1.6S + := R D S + :=
S 4495lbf :=
D 1500lbf :=
LRFD ASD Demand
0.25" steel plate (Table 13.2.3) C
st
1.0 :=
Less than 100 deg F (Table 10.3.4) C
t
1.0 :=
Wet service (Table 10.3.3) C
M
0.8 :=
K
F
3.323 = K
F
2.16
z
:=
z
0.65 :=
Snow Load
C
D
1.15 :=
(treat hanger face as two
plates, separated by carried
beam)
n
p
2 :=
t
p
0.25in := d
beam
13.5in :=
l
r
2.5in := Rivet/Plate: b
beam
5.125in := Wood:
continued
e
q
2in := Rivet-to-loaded wood edge distance
e
p
n
c
1 ( ) s
q
0.111 =
C
5.48 := (Table 13.2.2B interpolated)

p
l
r
t
p
0.125in ( )
in
:= p 2.125 =
Q
w
q
w
p
0.8
C
:= Q
w
11748.048lbf = 2005 NDS (13.2-3)
Rivet - from Equation 13.2-2
Q
r
160 p
0.32
n
R
n
c
lbf := Q
r
4072.91lbf = 2005 NDS (13.2-2)
Q min Q
w
Q
r
, ( ) := Q 4072.91lbf = Rivet controls
Capacity
Assume two rows in each plate, each side of hanger: s
p
1in :=
n
R
2 :=
Trial 3 - Try 10 rivets each row, spaced at 1"
perpendicular to grain.
s
q
1in :=
n
c
10 :=
Wood - From Table 13.2.2A (load on wood is perpendicular to grain):
q
w
1173lbf :=
Locate connection and check end and edge distances from Table 13.3.2
n
R
2 = a
p
3in := End distance parallel to grain
a
q
2in := End distance perp to grain
e
p
1in := Rivet-to-unloaded wood edge distance
e
ps
continued
Adjust to conditions with rivet capacity governing (Table 10.3.1, Footnotes 4 and 6),
remembering to drop the C
D
out of the ASD capacity when rivet yield controls (Footnote 4):
n
p
Q' Q n
p
C
M
C
t
:=
ASD LRFD
Q' 6516.656lbf =
z
K
F
Q' 11260.782lbf =
R
Q'
0.92 =
R
f

z
K
F
Q' ( )
0.799 = < 1.0 OK
Solution
end
D
1.2 :=
C
st
1.0 := 3/8" steel plate (Table 13.2.3)
W
1.6 :=
Demand ASD LRFD
M
D
100kip ft :=
D
M
D
120kip ft =
M
W
300kip ft :=
W
M
W
480kip ft =
D
M
D
d
beam
:= D 17.143kip =
W
M
W
d
beam
:= W 51.429kip =
T D W + := T
f

D
D
W
W + :=
T 68.571kip = T
f
102.857kip =
Figure 5
Example 3: Moment Connection with
Timber Rivets - ASD & LRFD
A three-pinned arch spanning 300 feet is built
using 12-1/4" x 70" 24F-V8 Douglas Fir
glulam. Each half-arch is to be spliced at the
mid-point for shipping. Design the splice to
resist a 400 k-ft moment due to wind 300 k-ft)
and dead (100 k-ft) loading. Ignore axial and
shear loads. Use 2005 NDS provisions.
Wood: b
beam
12.25in := Rivet/Plate: l
r
3.5in :=
d
beam
70in := t
p
0.375in :=
C
D
1.6 := Load Duration / Time Effect Factor
(ASD Table 2.3.2, LRFD Table N3)
Wind Load
1.0 :=
z
0.65 :=
K
F
2.16
z
:= K
F
3.323 =
C
M
C
t
continued
n
R
10 =
n
c
18 :=
P
r
280 p
0.32
n
R
n
c
lbf := P
r
71632.373lbf = 2005 NDS (13.2-1)
P min P
w
P
r
, ( ) := P 35650lbf = Wood controls
n
p
P' P n
p
C
M
C
t
C
st
:= 2005 NDS 13.2.1 +Table 10.3.1
ASD LRFD
C
D
P' 45.632kip =
z
K
F
P' 61.603kip =
R
top
C
D
P' := R
Ftop

z
K
F
P' :=
STEP 1: Capacity - Top Plate n
p
1 :=
Assume 3/8" top plate with 3 1/2" rivets: s
p
1in :=
n
Rmax
b
beam
1in 1in ( )
1in
:= n
Rmax
10.25 = Use n
R
10 :=
Trial 1 - Try 10 rows, 18 rivets each row,
spaced at 1" perpendicular to grain.
s
q
1in :=
n
c
18 :=
Wood - From Table 13.2.1E (P
w
values are needed for one plate on one side only - see table
footnote):
2 d
beam
140in = Member thickness per Table 13.2.1E footnote
P
w
35650lbf := 2005 NDS Table 13.2.1E
r
is "per plate")
p
l
r
t
p
0.125in ( )
in
:= p 3 =
continued
e
2
d
beam
2
PlateWidth
2
l
r
+ 1in +
:= e
2
43in =
ASD LRFD
T
side
M
D
M
W
+ R
top
e
1
( )
e
2
:= T
fside

D
M
D

W
M
W
+ R
Ftop
e
1
( )
e
2
:=
T
side
37.343kip = T
fside
67.158kip =
Trial 1 - Try 4 rivets each of 16 rows, spaced at
1" perpendicular to grain.
s
p
1in :=
n
Rmax
PlateWidth 1in 1in ( )
1in
:= n
Rmax
16 = Use: n
R
16 :=
s
q
1in :=
n
c
4 :=
n
p
2 := number of plates
T
R
top
( )
1.503 =
T
f
R
Ftop
( )
1.67 =
> 1.0 NG - GET
additional capacity
from plates on beam
sides
Check end and edge distances from 13.3.2
n
R
10 = a
p
4in := End distance
e
p
1in := Rivet to wood edge distance
e
ps
0.5in := Rivet to steel edge distance (Appendix M)
STEP 2: Capacity - Beam Side Plates
Provide additonal capacity for remaining moment resistance using rivet groups on both sides
of beam.
Assume 18"wide x 3/8"thick plates each side with 3 1/2" rivets:
PlateWidth 18in :=
e
1
d
beam
:= e
1
70in =
continued
P min P
w
P
r
, ( ) := P 25469.288lbf = Rivet controls
n
p
P' P n
p
C
M
C
t
C
st
:= 2005 NDS 13.2.1 +Table 10.3.1
ASD LRFD
P' 40.751kip =
z
K
F
P' 88.022kip =
R
sides
P' := R
Fsides

z
K
F
P' :=
M
D
M
W
+
R
top
e
1
R
sides
e
2
+ ( )
0.97 =

D
M
D

W
M
W
+
R
Ftop
e
1
R
Fsides
e
2
+ ( )
0.889 = < 1.0 OK
Wood - From Table 13.2.1E (P
w
is "per plate"):
Member thickness b
beam
12.25in =
Table interpolation: thickness1 10.5in := rivetCapacity1 39900lbf :=
thickness2 12.5in := rivetCapacity2 43880lbf :=
P
w
rivetCapacity1
b
beam
thickness1 ( )
thickness2 thickness1 ( )
rivetCapacity1 rivetCapacity2 ( ) :=
P
w
43382.5lbf = 2005 NDS Table 13.2.1E
r
is "per plate")
p
l
r
t
p
0.125in ( )
in
:= p 3 =
n
R
16 =
n
c
4 =
P
r
280 p
0.32
n
R
n
c
lbf := P
r
25469.288lbf = 2005 NDS (13.2-1)
continued
Check end and edge distances from 13.3.2
n
R
16 = a
p
7in := End distance - 8" provided, OK
e
p
1in := Rivet to wood edge distance - increased to allow for top rivets.
e
ps
1in := Rivet to steel edge distance ( >1/2" minimum, Appendix M)
Solution
As a final thought, there is extra capacity in the side plate design, so one more iteration would be
useful to optimize the number of rivets for perhaps a narrower side plate width.
end

Timber Rivet Connections

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Timber Rivet Connections

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Timber Rivet

design process for timber rivet

, (NDS Table 13.2.2B). Again, the reference design

software by Parametric Technology

). Therefore, formatting of certain variables and equations as

) for Wood Construction, 2005

magazine, NCSEA / CASE / SEI, Copper Creek

=N/A (Table 13.2.2B and Table 10.3.1 Footnote 6)

1.32 := (Table 13.2.2B interpolated)

5.48 := (Table 13.2.2B interpolated)

Você também pode gostar