Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
407417
Abstract
The widespread adoption of the European design code for timber structures EC5. will facilitate a number of design options
previously unsupported by British Standards. This code uses design equations that need characteristic material data, which exists
for solid timber and some sheet materials, but not for the structural timber composites that were evaluated in this research. In
this programme high-tensile steel black bolts have been used with solid timber, glulam and two commercially available structural
timber composites MicrolamTM and ParallamTM. The results suggest that the timber composites offer similar performance to
high-density timbers in line with EC5 design guidance. 2000 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Timber; Bolts; Composites
1. Introduction
The UK imports a significant proportion of its construction timber but is keen to better utilise its homegrown resources through various industry and government initiatives. One method that has the potential to
use the available resources efficiently is to produce
reconstituted wood products. Existing commercial
products include small pieces of wood bonded in a
formaldehyde-based resin-known as parallel strand
lumber PSL., and, more commonly, thin plies bonded
into a laminate-laminated veneer lumber LVL.. These
composite materials offer reduced variability and the
removal of strength-reducing defects such as knots. A
possible cause for concern is the fact that the reconstitution of the wood may give rise to internal voids which
will cause stress concentrations and hence increased
deformations within the highly stressed areas of a mechanically fastened joint. The results presented in this
2. Research significance
This paper presents results in order to show the
comparative performance of glued laminated timber
glulam. and two structural timber composites utilising
a standardised bolted connection. The work shows the
relative strength and stiffness of the reconstituted wood
materials when used with this jointing system. The
application and relative merits of the composites are
discussed. The new European design code, EC5, is
currently a draft for development within the UK. It
requires characteristic material data in order to facilitate timber design. There is currently a lack of available data for the design of joints, particularly with
structural timber composites.
0950-0618r00r$ - see front matter 2000 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
PII: S 0 9 5 0 - 0 6 1 8 0 0 . 0 0 0 4 4 - 1
408
T.J. Da is, P.A. Claisse r Construction and Building Materials 14 (2000) 407417
Table 1
Grade stresses of structural timber composites, Southern pine and European Whitewooda
Property
all values in Nrmm2 .
Wood type
Whitewood
SS.
Southern
pine SS.
Parallam
Microlam
2.1 E.
7.5
4.5
7.9
2.1
0.82
10 500
9.6
5.8
10.2
2.5
0.98
12 500
16.8
14.8
15.1
3.6r2.8
2.2
12 750
16.2
10.1
14.3
4.9r3.0
1.9
12 400
Southern pine is the source species for the composites, European Whitewood was used for solid timber and glulam samples in this research.
When loaded as a joist.
c
Parallelrperpendicular to glue linerwide face of strand.
b
3. Literature review
3.1. The use of structural timber composites
Structural timber composites were introduced to the
USA in the late 1980s in order to provide high-quality
structural timber that was proving difficult to obtain
from the natural forest resource w1x. These materials
were introduced to the UK construction industry in the
early 1990s and offered significantly higher grade
stresses than either solid softwood timber or glulam. As
can be seen in Table 1, the benefits of reconstitution
are an increase in permissible stresses of between
approximately 50 and 200% on the original solid timber. This results in the reconstituted products being
assigned a strength class of SC7 to BS 5268:1990 based
on bending strength.. The modulus of elasticity is
largely unaffected and since it is deflection that usually
governs the design of timber beams, the composites
appear to be best utilised in axially loaded structures
such as trusses. However, for joints in such structures,
the design grade is recommended as SC5. This apparent restriction on the design of joints in structural
wood composites was one of the main reasons for
initiating this programme of research.
Structural timber composites are currently used in
the UK predominantly to provide the more highly
stressed elements in timber-framed buildings w2x although their use in the USA has extended into short
and medium span highway bridges w3x. Several established sources for the mechanical properties of solid
wood species exist w4,5x. The authors found no published source for the mechanical properties of the
structural wood composites other than the grade
BBA. certifistresses in British Board of Agrement
w
x
cates 6,7 .
3.2. Timber jointing systems and their design
Several state-of-the-art reviews of mechanically fastened jointing systems have been performed, usually as
T.J. Da is, P.A. Claisse r Construction and Building Materials 14 (2000) 407417
Johansen w16x supplemented Trayers work and developed theoretical equations for predicting the yield load
and ultimate load of doweled joints that now form the
basis of design in EC5 w17x. Whale and Smith w18x
extended this work by performing an extensive testing
programme into the load-embedment response of
doweled joints. They concluded that there was a good
correlation between the embedment response and density of wood. Similar experimental techniques have
been employed on a range of investigations w1921x
that have since been integrated into current testing
standards w22x that were adopted for this research programme. Wilkinson compared design strengths based
on Johansens equations with the American design
standard w23x.
409
Fig. 1. Glulam and the family of structural timber composites produced by TrusJoist MacMillan.
410
T.J. Da is, P.A. Claisse r Construction and Building Materials 14 (2000) 407417
Fig. 2. Loading rig and LVDT positions for recording movement of the test joint.
T.J. Da is, P.A. Claisse r Construction and Building Materials 14 (2000) 407417
411
T.J. Da is, P.A. Claisse r Construction and Building Materials 14 (2000) 407417
412
Fig. 4. Typical load-slip response of joint test and identification of calculated test parameters.
shown in Fig. 4. The following parameters were obtained from the load-slip response:
The initial stiffness for the joint, representing bedding-in following joint fabrication, is 6070% of the
reload working. stiffness of the joint, and is used to
determine non-recoverable deformation of the joint.
The embedment strength is calculated according to the
relationship:
fh s
Fmax
dt
T.J. Da is, P.A. Claisse r Construction and Building Materials 14 (2000) 407417
413
Fig. 5. Embedment strength results columns represent test samples in sequential order..
T.J. Da is, P.A. Claisse r Construction and Building Materials 14 (2000) 407417
414
Table 2
Summarised results for bolted joints in solid timber a
Sample
number
Initial
stiffness Ki
kNrmm.
Stiffness
Ks
kNrmm.
Maximum
load Fmax
kN.
Slip at
maximum
load mm.
Embedment
strength fh
Nrmm2 .
Wood
density
kgrm3 .
Failure
mode
S-B-1
S-B-2
S-B-3
S-B-4
S-B-5
S-B-6
13.0
11.3
11.1
6.41
11.7
8.91
17.9
21.7
20.7
10.8
16.6
22.4
18.3
17.9
21.0
19.3
21.7
16.8
3.08
2.79
3.28
4.61
3.83
2.93
34.7
33.9
39.8
36.5
41.0
31.9
490
490
500
510
510
470
Splitting
Splitting
Splitting
Splitting
Splitting
Splitting
Ave.
CoV
10.4
0.23
18.3
0.24
19.2
0.10
3.42
0.20
36.3
0.10
490
0.03
mode of failure. The high-tensile steel bolts were generally unaffected, confirming the desired embedment
response, although the three strongest Parallam samples did cause noticeable permanent deformation. None
of the glulam samples failed at the glueline, the transverse splitting occurred in the adjacent wood.
Typical load-slip graphs for the tests are shown in
Fig. 9. On initial loading the joints exhibited a non-linear, non-recoverable, bedding-in response. Within
working stress levels, i.e. on reloading, the joints gave a
linear load-slip response but on loading beyond 0.4Fe st
the response was non-linear up to the maximum load,
which occurred at a slip of 24 mm. Some of the solid
timber samples exhibited extreme ductility Fig. 9a.
Table 3
Summarised results for bolted joints in glulama
Sample
number
Initial
stiffness Ki
kNrmm.
Stiffness
Ks
kNrmm.
Maximum
load Fmax
kN.
Slip at
maximum
load mm.
Embedment
strength fh
Nrmm2 .
Wood
density
kgrm3 .
Failure
mode
G-B-1
G-B-2
G-B-3
G-B-4
G-B-5
G-B-6
11.7
15.5
18.4
8.38
13.6
12.0
20.0
24.2
23.0
22.1
21.0
20.5
19.9
20.0
22.4
21.4
19.4
22.8
3.60
3.59
2.88
3.79
3.20
3.80
37.6
37.8
42.4
40.5
36.7
43.2
500
510
550
510
500
510
Splitting
Splitting
Splitting
Splitting
Splitting
Splitting
Ave.
CoV
13.5
0.28
22.1
0.08
20.6
0.06
3.41
0.11
39.0
0.06
510
0.04
Table 4
Summarised results for bolted joints in microlama
Sample
number
Initial
stiffness Ki
kNrmm.
Stiffness
Ks
kNrmm.
Maximum
load Fmax
kN.
Slip at
maximum
load mm.
Embedment
strength fh
Nrmm2 .
Wood
density
kgrm3 .
Failure
mode
M-B-1
M-B-2
M-B-3
M-B-4
M-B-5
M-B-6
M-B-7
M-B-8
19.2
13.8
18.4
9.01
30.4
26.1
24.1
25.6
20.7
20.0
31.8
18.6
36.7
38.1
40.8
66.1
28.0
30.5
26.8
28.0
24.8
25.1
29.0
26.0
3.49
3.24
2.08
4.14
1.35
1.35
1.62
1.96
54.2
59.0
51.9
54.3
48.0
49.9
57.5
51.6
650
640
650
640
630
690
700
660
Splitting
Splitting
Splitting
Splitting
Splitting
Splitting
Shear
Splitting
Ave.
Cov
18.2
0.44
25.5
0.32
27.6
0.07
2.86
0.39
53.5
0.07
640
0.01
T.J. Da is, P.A. Claisse r Construction and Building Materials 14 (2000) 407417
415
Table 5
Summarised results for bolted joints in parallama
Sample
number
Initial
stiffness Ki
kNrmm.
Stiffness
Ks
kNrmm.
Maximum
load Fmax
kN.
Slip at
maximum
load mm.
Embedment
strength fh
Nrmm2 .
Wood
density
kgrm3 .
Failure
mode
P-B-1
P-B-2
P-B-3
P-B-4
P-B-5
P-B-6
5.28
16.9
19.2
20.0
13.0
15.7
12.3
21.0
38.0
20.9
18.6
20.8
21.7
38.7
21.1
36.6
32.8
42.9
5.09
4.29
1.84
4.64
3.77
5.26
41
73
41
71
62
81
660
780
680
760
800
760
Splitting
Splitting
Splitting
Splitting
Splitting
Combined
Ave.
Cov
14.9
0.40
22.2
0.43
30.2
0.28
3.93
0.32
58
0.27
740
0.09
7. Discussion
The positioning of a bolted connection on the glueline appears to have no detrimental effect on the
performance of the joint. The structural timber composites give an increased embedment strength relative
to solid timber and glulam. The higher density of these
materials would suggest a higher strength and this is
confirmed. An actual embedment strengthdensity relationship is not offered but is likely to be similar to
that for bolted joints in plywood. The composites
showed a wider variation in response than the solid
timber samples, especially given that the actual material is more homogeneous. This is misleading however,
since the natural wood samples used in this experiment
were carefully selected more so than would be the
case in stress-graded timber for construction.
Microlam gave the best overall performance in terms
of strength and stiffness but showed a lower joint slip
at maximum load than solid timber and glulam. The
Parallam samples were in many ways disappointing.
Their results were generally the most variable and gave
lower joint stiffness values than their density would
suggest. Visual inspection showed that internal voids
were present in the bearing zone of the joint and this is
416
T.J. Da is, P.A. Claisse r Construction and Building Materials 14 (2000) 407417
the likely explanation for the performance of the samples during testing. This is at odds with Parallams
performance in flexure where it offers better strength
and stiffness than Microlam.
8. Conclusions
Bolted connections in structural timber composites
appear to give strength and stiffness properties at least
comparable to a solid timber of similar density. The
positioning of a bolted connection on the glueline of a
glulam member does not detrimentally affect the joints
performance. The internal voids contained within par-
Acknowledgements
The authors gratefully acknowledge the support of
the EPSRC and its staff for this project.
T.J. Da is, P.A. Claisse r Construction and Building Materials 14 (2000) 407417
417
Fig. 9. Typical load-slip graphs for bolted joints in: a. solid wood; b. glulam; c. microlam; and d. parallam.
References
w1x Moody R., Ritter M. Structural wood products. Proceedings of
the First Materials Engineering Congress Pt. 1, ASCE, Boston,
MA, USA,1990: 4152.
w2x Milner MW, Bainbridge RJ. New opportunities for timber
engineering. Struct Eng 1997;7516.:278282.
w3x Meyer CB. Structural wood composites in bridge construction.
Proceedings of the First Materials Engineering Congress Pt. 1,
ASCE, Boston, MA, USA,1990: 413422.
w4x Lavers GM. The strength properties of timber. 3rd ed Watford,
UK: Building Research Establishment, 1983.
w5x Bodig J, Jayne BA. Mechanics of wood and wood composites.
New York, USA: Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1982:1982.
w6x Parallam PSL Parallel Strand Lumber.. British Board of Agre
ment BBA. certificate no. 92r2813 second issue 1996., BBA,
Watford, UK, 1996.
w7x Microlam LVL Laminated Veneer Lumber.. British Board of
BBA. certificate no. 94r3040 second issue 1994.,
Agrement
w13x
w14x
w15x
w16x
w17x
w18x
w19x
w20x
w21x
w22x
w23x
w24x