Construction and Building Materials 14 2000.

407417

Bolted joints in glulam and structural timber composites

Tim J. DavisU , Peter A. Claisse
School of the Built En ironment, Co entry Uni ersity, Co entry, CV1 5FB, UK
Received 15 November 1999; received in revised form 1 August 2000; accepted 20 August 2000

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

Corresponding author. Tel.: q44-2476-888-485; fax: q44-2476838-485.

E-mail address: t.davis@coventry.ac.uk T.J. Davis..

paper are taken from a larger investigation into the

performance of mechanically fastened joints in structural timber composites. As part of this programme the
use of resin-injected dowelled joints has also been
assessed.

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.

Bending parallel to grainb

Tension parallel to grain
Compression parallel to grain
Compression perpendicular to grainc
Shear parallel to grainb
Modulus of elasticity in bending mean.

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

a result of the introduction of new design codes that

rely on existing research data. The first significant
review was performed in the 1930s during which the
mode of action of a wide range of timber connectors
was established. The American Society of Civil Engineers ASCE. provided a much needed up-to-date review w8x which details the design rules, and supporting
research, of timber joint design in the USA, Canada
and UK. New jointing systems that utilise structural
adhesives are being investigated that show enhanced
structural performance over mechanically fastened
joints w9x.
UK timber design is currently going through a major
period of change as a result of the introduction of the
draft EC5 w10x and BS 5268: Part 1, which are both
partial coefficients limit states design codes rather than
the permissible stress approach used by BS 5268: Part 2
w11x. In anticipation of the introduction of the new
codes the Timber Research and Development Association TRADA. conducted a review w12x of design practice for timber joints and established research data that
was needed to support joint design to the new EC5
design code. The review highlighted the general lack of
research data available, particularly for the new structural timber composites. In support of the introduction
of EC5 and promoting the use of timber within Europe
the STEPrEUROFORTECH initiative produced a significant review of timber engineering including jointing
systems w13x. A similar work is available for US design
standards w14x.
3.3. Bolted connections in plain timber
Nails, bolts and dowels whether utilising an interference fit or some form of resin bonding. are all examples of mechanical fasteners that form timber joints
through a laterally loaded dowel action. Trayer w15x
performed an extensive research programme into bolted
joints involving several wood species and joint configurations. This work formed the basis of the empirical
design data for UK permissible stress design codes.

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

4. Laboratory testing programme

The solid timber was commercially available European WhitewoodrRedwood, visually graded SS C24 to
EC5., obtained from a local timber merchant. Selected,
conditioned, pieces of this wood were used to manufacture the glulam joint samples using a resorcinol-formaldehyde resin.
The LVL and PSL structural wood composites were
both products of the American company TrusJoist
MacMillan w24x-ParallamTM PSL Grade 2.0E and MicrolamTM LVL Grade 2.1E. They are both forms of
reconstituted wood: Parallam is made from strands of
Douglas Fir or Southern Pine timber bonded together
with a phenol-formaldehyde PF. adhesive, while Mi-

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

crolam is made from laminated veneers of Southern

Pine timber bonded, again bonded with a PF adhesive.
The lay-up of these materials is shown in Fig. 1.
The testing programme utilised in this research has
been fully described previously w21x. In summary, all
wood was conditioned for 3 weeks prior to the test,
which was performed in accordance with BS EN 26891
in order to give a load-deformation response. This
involves a multi-stage loading regime, the key elements
of which are: initial loading to 40% of the estimated
maximum load Fest ., approximately the working load,
of the joint; removal of load to 10% of Fest and finally
loading to failure.
A total of 26 samples were tested using 12-mm
diameter Grade 8.8 bolts in a 13-mm diameter hole. Six

samples were made from solid timber, glulam and

Parallam and 8 samples from Microlam. The samples
had a nominal thickness of 44-mm, which resulted in
an embedment response a Lrd ratio of 3.67.. The
experimental arrangement, showing the sample dimensions and positioning of LVDTs for this series of tests,
is reproduced in Fig. 2. The actual loading rig, with the
LVDTs removed for clarity, is shown in Fig. 3.

5. Results of the testing programme

A typical load-slip response resulting from the test,
and the identification of the derived characteristics, is

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

Fig. 3. Loading rig with LVDTs removed for clarity.

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:

Fmax , the maximum load in kN achieved by the

joint, and the corresponding slip in mm;
f h , the embedment strength in Nrmm2 , defined as
Fmaxrprojected area of the fastener;
K i , the initial stiffness of the joint in kNrmm,
determined from a linear regression analysis of the
load-slip response after any initial slip and 0.4 Fest ;
and
K s , the stiffness of the joint in kNrmm, determined
from a linear regression analysis of the load-slip
response during the reloading stage 0.1 to 0.4 Fest .

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

where d is the diameter of the bolt 12 mm., and t is

the thickness of the test sample 44 " 1 mm..
A summary of the embedment strength and stiffness
results is shown in Figs. 5 and 6, respectively. On these
graphs all of the samples are shown in order to indicate
the spread of the data. Other test results, including
modes of failure are listed in Tables 25 for each of

the base wood materials. The embedment strengths

were very consistent with low coefficients of variation
for all but the Parallam samples. The coefficient of
variation CV. of a set of results has been defined as
the ratio of its mean to the standard deviation ny 1 .
of the results. The joint stiffness values, however, are
much more variable-both within a material group, and
between groups. The glulam and solid timber results
are comparable although some solid samples exhibited
extreme ductility in excess of 10 mm at failure.. It can
be concluded that the glueline had no apparent detrimental effect on joint strength or stiffness, in fact the
stiffness, and slip at maximum load was much less
variable in the glulam. The Microlam samples performed consistently better in both strength and, especially, stiffness terms. They also exhibited less slip at
maximum load although it was four times more variable.. The Parallam samples were particularly disappointing, exhibiting the widest variations in results, but
this is due to the presence of internal voids visible
during fabrication ., the relatively large variation in
sample density, and the influence of the relatively poor
results of samples P-B-1 and P-B-3 which had a lower
than average density.
Fig. 7 shows the embedment strength of all the
samples plotted against their density. These results
follow a linear trend consistent with the embedmentdensity relationships given in EC5 for solid timber and
plywood.
For solid timber f h,0,k s 0.0821 y 0.01d . k
giving f h s 0.072

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..

and for plywood f h,0,k s 0.111 y 0.01d . k

giving f h s 0.097 .
No comparable equation for the structural timber
composites is offered due to the low number of samples not being statistically significant. Similarly, average
rather than characteristic values for the joint properties
are reported here.

6. Load-slip responses and modes of failure

All but two samples exhibited a splitting mode of
failure Fig. 8.. This took the form of local crushing of
the wood fibres at the bearing interface followed by
transverse perpendicular to the grain. tension failure,
the remaining two samples exhibited a block-shear

Fig. 6. Joint stiffness results, initial stiffness K i and stiffness K s .

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

Moisture content at test s 11 " 2%.

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

Moisture content at test s 12 " 1%.

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

Moisture content at test 7 " 1%.

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

Moisture content at test 8 " 1%.

although the majority behaved in a similar manner

to the glulam samples Fig. 9b.. A number of the
Microlam samples were noticeably brittle in their
response-failing suddenly at the maximum load Fig.
9c.. Although this behaviour did occur in some of the
Parallam samples the majority exhibited similar loadslip responses Fig. 9d. to solid wood and glulam.

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

Fig. 7. Embedment strength plotted against wood density.

416

T.J. Da is, P.A. Claisse r Construction and Building Materials 14 (2000) 407417

Fig. 8. Local crushing and longitudinal splitting failure of a Microlam sample.

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-

allel strand lumber appear to produce a lower, more

variable, performance in bolted connections than their
performance in flexure would suggest. This behaviour
needs further investigation since the embedment
strength of wood materials that is used in the design of
timber connections to EC5 is largely dependent on
wood density. The presence of these internal voids, not
visible during fabrication, would not be taken into
account under current EC5 design rules.

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

BBA, Watford, UK, 1994.

w8x Mechanical connections in wood structures. ASCE Manuals
and Reports on Engineering Practice No. 84, ASCE, New
York, USA, 1996.
w9x Claisse PA, Davis TJ. High performance jointing systems for
timber. Constr Build Mater 1998;12:415425.
w10x DD ENV 1995-1-1: 1994. Eurocode 5-design of timber structures: part 1.1: general rules and rules for buildings. British
Standards Institution, London, 1994.
w11x BS 5268: 1991. Structural use of timber: part 2: code of practice
for permissible stress design, materials and workmanship.
British Standards Institution, London, 1991.
w12x Page AV, Mettem CJ. Efficient detailing of mechanical joints
in engineered timber structures. Research Report 2r93, Tim-

w13x
w14x
w15x
w16x
w17x
w18x
w19x
w20x
w21x
w22x

w23x
w24x

ber Research and Development Association, High Wycombe,

UK, 1993.
Timber Engineering STEP 1. Centrum Hout, The Netherlands,
1995.
Wood handbook: wood as an engineering material. Forest
Products Laboratory, US Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC, USA, 1987.
Trayer GW. The bearing strength of wood under bolts. Technical Bulletin 332, US Department of Agriculture, Washington,
DC, USA, 1932.
Johansen KW. Theory of timber connections, vol. 9. Zurich,
Switzerland: Int. Assoc. for Bridge and Structural Eng. Publications, 1949:249262.
Hilson BO, Whale LRJ. Developments in the design of timber
joints. Struct Eng 1990;688.:148150.
Whale LRJ, Smith I. Mechanical timber joints. Research Report 18r86, Timber Research and Development Association,
High Wycombe, UK, 1986.
Church JR, Tew BW. Characterization of bearing strength
factors in pegged timber construction. J Struct Eng 1997;
1233.:326332.
Erki MA. Modelling the load-slip behaviour of timber joints
with mechanical fasteners. Can J Civil Eng 1991;184.:607616.
Rodd PD, Spriggs RA, Hilson BO. Prediction of embedment
characteristics for laterally loaded resin injected bolts in timber. Proc Int Timber Eng Conf, London, UK, 1991: 350357.
BS EN 26891. Timber structures joints made with mechanical fasteners general principles for the determination of
strength and deformation characteristics. British Standards Institution, London, 1991.
Wilkinson TL. Bolted connection design values based on European Yield Model. J Struct Eng 1993;1197.:21692186.
TrusJoist MacMillan, 4225 Kincaid Street, Burnaby, British
Columbia, Canada V5G 4P5.