2018 Researchreport - Press Gluing - Final Report Complete 600dpi

Investigation and analysis of press
glued connections for timber structures

Research report
Authors:
Marcus Schiere
Steffen Franke
Bettina Franke
‣‣Institute for Timber Construction, Structures and Architecture

Investigation and analysis of press
glued connections for timber structures
Research report
Report Nr. K.007404.77FE-V1
Contract Nr. SBFI No. C15.0052
Classification Public
Date 3rd July 2018
Client State Secretariat for Education Research and Innovation SERI

Hallwylstrasse 4
3003 Bern
Address of the Bern University of Applied Sciences

research unit Institute for Timber Constructions, Structures and Architecture
Solothurnstrasse 102
CH-2500 Biel 6
Tel / Fax +41 (0)32 344 03 41/91
www.ahb.bfh.ch
Authors Marcus Schiere, Steffen Franke, Bettina Franke
Project Leader Prof. Dr. Steffen Franke
Head of the Institute Prof. Andreas Müller
Bern University of Applied Sciences

Institute for Timber Constructions,Structures and Architecture
ISBN 978-3-906878-01-0
© by Bern University of Applied Sciences
2018
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced in any form or by any means, elec-
tronical, mechanical, photocopying, recording, scanning or otherwise, without permission of the pub-
lisher.
Published by
Institute for Timber Construction, Structures and Architecture
2500 Biel 6
Switzerland
Federal Department of Economic Affairs,
Education and Research EAER
State Secretariat for Education,
Research and Innovation SERI
European Cooperation in Science and Technology COST
COST - Scientific report

European Cooperation in Science and Technology
COST Action number FP1402
SERI project number C15.0052
Action title
Basis of strcutral timber design – from reseach to standards
Project title
Investigation and analysis of press glued connections for timber structures
Project duration from 01.12.2015 to 26.06.2018
Reporting period from 01.12.2015 to 26.06.2018
Intermediate report
Final report
Recipient of subsidy
Family name Franke
First name(s) Steffen
Academic title Prof. Dr.
Business address Bern University of Applied Sciences

Solothurnstrasse 102, 2500 Biel-Bienne 6
e-mail steffen.franke@bfh.ch
Phone 032 344 0305
State Secretariat for Education, Research and Innovation SERI

COST
Effingerstrasse 27, CH-3003 Bern
Phone +41 31 322 88 82, Fax +41 31 322 78 54
COST@sbfi.admin.ch
www.sbfi.admin.ch
Research Report SBFI No. C15.0052 - Investigation and analysis of press glued connections for timber structures
Abstract
Screw and nail press gluing is a connection Numerical simulations were performed to in-
method with multidisciplinary application. The vestigate the distribution of the pressure be-
goal is to generate sufficient pressure between tween two bonded elements. The numerical
two connected structural elements during the model was generated in Ansys® and fastener
curing of the adhesive. If this is successful, full distance and size, material geometry, and ap-
composite action between the two separate plied load could be investigated. The material
members is achieved. When pin type fasteners anisotropy was reflected in the material and in
are used, vacuum, pneumatic, or hydraulic the results, where isobars of the pressure were
presses are not needed and elements can be oval shaped.
bonded on site, in confined spaces, or still in
Adhesives for these applications were tested
the workshop/production hall. Examples of
already in several studies, but all with slightly
screw and nail press gluing can be found: hol-
different configurations of fasteners, adhe-
low box elements, reinforcements of beams
sives, and wood-based materials. Most popular
with notches and holes through the addition of
adhesives used are one-component polyure-
a plywood panel on the sides for instance,
thane adhesive, epoxy adhesives and phenol
addition of extra lamellas to existing beams to
resorcinol formaldehyde adhesives. Additional
reinforce existing buildings, etc.
tests were carried out with one-component
Screw and nail press gluing is not regulated in polyurethane adhesives to investigate differ-
any known Timber Construction Standard ex- ences between ideal conditions (constant cur-
cept for the German Eurocode 5 within the ing pressure) under which adhesives are test-
National Annexes. Nail press gluing was al- ed, the conditions under which it would be
lowed until 2004 in the old DIN 1052:1988. used in production (with fasteners), and some
Afterwards screw press gluing was allowed worst-case scenarios with a fixed gap width
only and is still possible. The standard recom- between the joined materials. The experiments
mends the production conditions, fastener suggest that curing under constant pressure
sizes and distances, surface quality of the generates the strongest bond quality, although
bonded material, etc. Additional recommenda- differences are not very large.
tions are made in data sheets published by
Screw and nail press gluing have a great poten-
engineering offices. One of the large un-
tial for continued application in the future.
knowns is the generated curing pressure that
Economic methods need to be developed to
can be achieved through screws and nails.
apply sufficient distribution of curing pressure
The curing loads generated by the pin type between two elements. Mistakes during pro-
fasteners were obtained through experiments. duction are easily made, which is one of the
Load transducers separated a wood panel and reasons why it is not very popular amongst the
a solid wood rib with only minimal distance in wood industry. Through the large variation of
between. This setup allowed measurement of materials and methods used, it is impossible
the force over short and long periods of time. to draw a conclusive answer on the bond quali-
Systematic variations in geometry and types of ty of the nail and screw press gluing. The re-
fasteners (different head type), wood materials port provides ways to achieve sufficient bond
(solid wood panels and Kerto), and production quality due to the influence of the parameters
methods were tested (hand held tools and au- investigated. Final bond quality should be test-
tomatic nailers in a production bridge for in- ed as soon as production method, fastener
stance). Fastener diameter and fastener head type, used adhesive, etc. have been set.
geometry proved to be important parameters
in the generation of the compression load.
Keywords: Timber structures, press gluing, mechanical fasteners, methods, load carrying capacities,
numerical analyses
Berner Fachhochschule | Haute école spécialisée bernoise | Bern University of Applied Sciences V / 113
Table of Content
Glossary ............................................................................................................................................. IX
1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Press gluing ............................................................................................................................ 1
1.2 Objectives and deliverables ..................................................................................................... 1
1.3 General work package outline and organization ...................................................................... 2
1.4 Report setup ........................................................................................................................... 2
1.5 Partnerships ............................................................................................................................ 2
2 Work Package 1 - Material and boundary conditions ....................................................................... 3

2.1 General/Work package contents .............................................................................................. 3
2.2 Applications, production, and alternatives ............................................................................... 3
2.3 Rules, regulations and product data sheets ............................................................................. 4
2.3.1 Recommendations from standards and product data sheets ............................................. 4
2.3.2 Fasteners .......................................................................................................................... 6
2.3.3 Timber and material ......................................................................................................... 6
2.3.4 Adhesives ......................................................................................................................... 7
2.3.5 Processes ......................................................................................................................... 7
2.4 Conclusions ............................................................................................................................ 8
3 Work Package 2 - Determination of the achievable pressure using pinned fasteners ....................... 9
3.1 Work package contents ........................................................................................................... 9
3.2 Measurement of compression loads of single fasteners (Milestone 1) ...................................... 9
3.3 Investigation of compression capacity of single fasteners ...................................................... 10
3.3.1 Observed load history and data analysis ......................................................................... 10
3.4 Used equipment .................................................................................................................... 10
3.5 Compression loads of single fasteners .................................................................................. 12
3.5.1 Nail type fasteners with hand held tools ......................................................................... 12
3.5.2 Screw type fasteners ....................................................................................................... 12
3.5.3 Load reduction over long measuring times and material type ......................................... 15
3.6 Effect of fastener head depth on achieved compressive load ................................................. 15
3.7 Investigation of compression capacity of multiple fasteners .................................................. 16
3.8 Comparison of achieved compression loads with those found in literature ............................ 17
3.9 Conclusions .......................................................................................................................... 18
4 Work Package 3 - Numerical simulations of the press glued connection ........................................ 19

4.1 General ................................................................................................................................. 19
4.2 Pressure distributions found in literature............................................................................... 19
4.3 Numerical studies and models ............................................................................................... 19
4.4 Parameter study .................................................................................................................... 20
4.5 Conclusions .......................................................................................................................... 22
5 Work Package 4 - Investigation of the mechanical behavior of press glued connections ................ 23
5.1 General ................................................................................................................................. 23
5.2 Shear load capacity of the bond found in literature ................................................................ 23
5.3 Quality and capacity of the shear bond .................................................................................. 25
5.3.1 Evaluation of the bond .................................................................................................... 25
5.3.2 Performed tests and used materials ................................................................................ 25
5.3.3 Test results of the EN 14080:2013 ................................................................................. 26
5.3.4 Curing behavior .............................................................................................................. 28
5.3.5 Shear load capacity and substrate failure rate ................................................................. 29
5.4 Conclusions on mechanical behaviour ................................................................................... 30
VI / 113 Berner Fachhochschule | Haute école spécialisée bernoise | Bern University of Applied Sciences
6 Work Package 5 - Drafting of design rules and guidelines............................................................. 31

6.1 Optimization of achievable curing pressure through choice of fastener ................................. 31
6.2 Estimated fastener distances to achieve a minimum curing pressure ..................................... 31
6.3 Choice of adhesive and final bond quality ............................................................................. 32
6.4 Fasteners, material, adhesives, and production ..................................................................... 33
7 Work Package 6 - Transfer of knowledge, summary and report ..................................................... 33

7.1 Publications on national and international level ..................................................................... 33
7.2 Project papers, and thesis ..................................................................................................... 33
8 Conclusions and outlook .............................................................................................................. 34
9 Acknowledgement........................................................................................................................ 34
10 Regulations of the present report ................................................................................................. 34
11 Indexes ........................................................................................................................................ 35
11.1 Bibliography ........................................................................................................................ 35
11.1.1 Publications related to this project ............................................................................... 35
11.1.2 General ........................................................................................................................ 35
11.2 Index of Tables ................................................................................................................... 37
11.3 Index of Figures .................................................................................................................. 37
Appendix A Head pull through strengths of screws and nails.......................................................... 39

A.1 Head pull through resistances of screws ............................................................................... 39
A.2 Head pull through resistances of nails .................................................................................. 41
Appendix B Milestone measurement of fastener loads .................................................................... 43

B.1 Sensor setup ......................................................................................................................... 43
B.2 Measurement accuracy tested under a mechanical material testing machine .......................... 44
B.3 Measurement of screw and nail forces ................................................................................... 45
B.4 Conclusion and recommendations ......................................................................................... 46
Appendix C Calculation of statistical parameters ............................................................................ 47
Appendix D Measured compression by different fasteners .............................................................. 49

D.1 Fasteners NS1.1 loads measured 10 seconds after peak ....................................................... 49
D.2 Fasteners NS1.2 loads measured 10 seconds after peak ....................................................... 50
D.3 Fasteners NR2.1 loads measured 10 seconds after peak ....................................................... 51
D.7 Fasteners SC1 loads measured 10 seconds after peak ........................................................... 55
D.8 Fasteners SC1E loads measured 10 seconds after peak ......................................................... 56
D.9 Fasteners SC2 loads measured 10 seconds after peak ........................................................... 57
D.10 Fasteners SV5.2 loads measured 10 seconds after peak (Kerto) .......................................... 58
D.11 Fasteners SV5.2 fastener groups loads measured 10 seconds after peak ............................ 58
D.12 Fasteners SC3 loads measured 10 seconds after peak ......................................................... 59
D.13 Fasteners SC4 loads measured 10 seconds after peak ......................................................... 60
D.14 Fasteners SV5.1 loads measured 10 seconds after peak ...................................................... 61
D.16 Fasteners SV5.2 loads measured 10 seconds after peak (Kerto) .......................................... 63
D.17 Fasteners SV5.2 fastener group loads measured 10 seconds after peak .............................. 63
D.20 Fasteners SW6 loads measured 10 seconds after peak ........................................................ 66
D.21 Fasteners SW6 fastener group loads measured 10 seconds after peak ................................ 67
D.22 Fasteners SD7 loads measured 10 seconds after peak ........................................................ 68
Berner Fachhochschule | Haute école spécialisée bernoise | Bern University of Applied Sciences VII / 113
Appendix E Experiments Brawand .................................................................................................. 71

E.1 Einleitung .............................................................................................................................. 71
E.2 Prüfaufbau und Messtechnik .................................................................................................. 71
E.3 Vorpresskraft des Pushers ..................................................................................................... 73
E.4 Auswertung der Ergebnisse ................................................................................................... 73
E.5 Erreichte Presskräfte von Nagelschrauben und Klammer ........................................................ 74
E.6 Presskräfte der Tellerkopfschrauben ...................................................................................... 75
E.7 Diskussion der erhaltene Presskräfte Nagelschrauben und Klammern .................................... 76
E.8 Überlegungen zum Klebstoff ................................................................................................. 77
E.9 Fazit und Empfehlungen ........................................................................................................ 77
E.10 Danksagung ........................................................................................................................ 77
Appendix F Quality of press glued bonds ....................................................................................... 79

F.1 Series Ideal Conditions 1 (IC1) ............................................................................................... 79
F.4 Serie production conditions 1 (PC1) ....................................................................................... 88
F.5 Series production conditions 2 (PC2) ..................................................................................... 91
F.6 Series production conditions 3 (PC3) ..................................................................................... 94
F.7 Series other conditions 1 (OC1) ............................................................................................. 97
F.8 Series other conditions 2 (OC2) ........................................................................................... 100
F.9 Series other conditions 3 (OC3) ........................................................................................... 104
F.10 Series other conditions 4 (OC4) ......................................................................................... 108
F.11 Series other conditions 5 (PC5) .......................................................................................... 111
8
VIII / 113 Berner Fachhochschule | Haute école spécialisée bernoise | Bern University of Applied Sciences
Glossary
Unit
L Longitudinal material direction
R Radial material direction
T Tangential material direction
A Area [mm2]
E , MOE Modulus of elasticity [N/mm2]
F Force [kN]
Fi Force acting on one single connector [kN]
N Normal force, axial force [kN]
b Beam width [mm]
d Diameter, outer thread diameter [mm]
d1 Inner thread diameter [mm]
hi Beam height [mm]
l ef Effective length of a screw [mm]
α Angle between wood grain and connector axis [°]

ρ Wood density [kg/m3]
ρk Characteristic value (5th percentile) of wood density [kg/m3]
ρ mean Mean value of wood density [kg/m3]
σ Stress [N/mm2]
Berner Fachhochschule | Haute école spécialisée bernoise | Bern University of Applied Sciences IX / 113
1 Introduction
1.1 Press gluing
The screw and nail press glued connection method has a multidisciplinary application. The connec-
tions can be carried out with a wide range of fasteners. These need to provide a sufficient pressure
between two joined surfaces during the curing process of the adhesive. Full composite action between
separate members will result when performed properly. Several examples of basic connections and
reinforcements are observed in Figure 1 and Figure 2. The connections can be found in hollow box
elements in floors and roofs, [1], the reinforcements are found in beams with notches and holes but
also in previously damaged structures or details, [2].
The only design standard in Europe providing regulations to carry out press glued connections, alt-
hough lately only through screws, is the German Eurocode 5, [3] where the National Annex, [4] refer-
ences to DIN 1052-10:2012 [5]. Material types and thicknesses, fastener design and dimensions, as
well as the distances between fasteners or reference surfaces are defined for instance. However, no
values for the quality control or guidelines during the production or of the final product are specified.
Engineering offices outside of Germany offer further refinements to the recommendations in the German
National Annex [7], [8], [9]. Research on this method has also been conducted throughout Europe and
beyond [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], demonstrating that the method is broadly applied in several countries.
For a wide use of this technique, also with fasteners like nails or staples, engineers, practitioners and
producers need guidelines to provide reliable connections. The objective of the project is to investi-
gate this by investigating the different components of the connection and the production process.
1.2 Objectives and deliverables

The objectives of the project were:
- The general investigation of the realization of press glued connection with different fasteners,
- Defining of boundary conditions, and
- Determining of design and production rules.
The intention was not to develop a new fastener or a new adhesive. Different types of fasteners which
are standardized (screws), but also alternatives which are economically more efficient in the produc-
tion process (ring nails, screw nails, staples), were tested to determine the achievable force they could
generate on the joined surface. Experiments were performed under laboratory and industrial condi-
Figure 1: Structural members produced with press glued connections, T-Beam (A), I-Beam (B), Ribbed panel (C), Double
Beam (D), Box-Beam (E), according to [1]
Figure 2: Connection assembled (A), reinforced end notch or hole (B), (C), according to [2]
Berner Fachhochschule | Haute école spécialisée bernoise | Bern University of Applied Sciences 1 / 113
1 Introduction
tions. Alongside, numerical simulations provided results including a wider variation of the influencing
parameters. The conditions under which press glued connections are produced will be respected. The
third objective included practical design rules and guidelines for practitioners, engineers, and pro-
ducers as well as possibilities to carry out quality control of these connections.
The foreseen deliverables in relation to the objectives of the project can be summarized as follows:
- Definition of requirements on materials and boundary conditions (wood products, fasteners,
adhesives),
- Development of a measurement setup to reliably measure the press capacity after the inser-
tion of the fastener for the quality assessment of the production,
- Simulation model to investigate pressure distribution and perform parametric studies,
- Knowledge about the achievable press capacity of single fasteners and fasteners as a group,
- Knowledge about the production line and their verification, surveillance, reliability,
- Confirmed design rules and guidelines for press glued connections,
- Guidelines and quality control methods for the design and production, and
- Scientific publications and knowledge transfer to international and national platforms, con-
ferences and meetings or workshops
1.3 General work package outline and organization

The project was subdivided into six work packages (WP):
- WP1: Material and boundary conditions
- WP2: Experiments to determine pressure force of single pin-type fasteners,
- WP3: Numerical studies to analyze pressure distribution around fasteners,
- WP4: Study of the pressure force of fastener groups,
- WP5: Definition of recommendations for guidelines, and
- WP6: Knowledge transfer.
The work was carried out at the Bern University of Applied Sciences by the Institute for Timber Con-
struction, Structures and Architecture. The project ran from November 2015 to November 2017. Due
to a setback in the achievability of the milestone to measure pressing capacities set in WP2, Milestone
1, the project end was postponed to May 2018 with the agreement of the Swiss Secretariat for Educa-
tion, Research, and Innovation (SERI).
1.4 Report setup

The report summarizes the contents of the different work packages. An outline of the applications,
the used materials and production methods, and the definition of project focusses is discussed in
Chapter 2. Then single components such as fasteners, pressure distribution, and adhesive bond will
be discussed in Chapter 3, 4, and 5 respectively. Guidelines are set up in Chapter 6. Chapter 7 con-
tains a list of the publications and presentations given to disseminate the obtained knowledge. Final-
ly, overall conclusions are drawn and an outlook will be given.
1.5 Partnerships
The research project was supported by providing equipment, expertise, or material by industrial part-
ners:
- Haubold Passbolde Switzerland
- Brawand Zimmerei
- Würth AG, Schweiz
Their contributions are thankfully acknowledged.
2 / 113 Berner Fachhochschule | Haute école spécialisée bernoise | Bern University of Applied Sciences
2 Work Package 1 - Material and boundary conditions

2.1 General/Work package contents
The section contains a general outline of the screw and nail press gluing process with screws, nails
and staples. It discusses the boundary conditions in detail by treating the contents of the German
National Annex, analyzing requirements regarding the used materials and discussing further research
and industry recommendations briefly. It finally sets priorities for the contents of the further research
performed in the work packages.
2.2 Applications, production, and alternatives

Examples of basic details or applications of the screw and nail press gluing technique were already
visualized in Figure 1 and Figure 2. Structures in which these components were used are shown in
Figure 3. These examples are the ExpoDach in Hannover, Germany, the Leonardo da Vinci bridge in
Norway and the Sibelius hall in Finland. In the latter, screw gluing techniques were used to make bal-
cony elements. In the first two, glued laminated beams were either screwed together or used to con-
struct box beams or composed glulam elements.
The construction of box beams is widely applied throughout industry, where an upper and bottom
plate are separated by ribs to build stress skin panels or box elements, e.g. as flange and web respec-
tively. Materials considered for the plating are either Kerto-Q or solid wood plates. For the ribs, either
Kerto-Q or -S or solid wood is used.
An example of such a box element is given as two 27 mm thick solid wood panels on top and bottom
screw-glued on a 200 mm by 80 mm rib (height x width), each spaced at 480 mm (center to center),
[11]. The box type element mentioned to construct the Sibelius Hall in Finland was made of Kerto-LVL
panels of 49 mm thick to span lengths of 8 m. In the Waldau Stadium in Stuttgart, Germany, box
beam elements of 17 m by 3.39 m were made with Kerto-LVL (Kerto Q) flange panels and glulam I-
beam elements, each having 70 mm thick webs and being spaced approximately 900 mm apart. Ele-
ments were screw-glued together on site. A similar technique was used in the construction of roof
a b c
d e f
Figure 3: Outstanding example of structures manufactured using the press gluing technique. (a) and (d) the ExpoDach in
Hannover (Boller 2006) [1], (b) and (e) the Leonardo da Vinci bridge in Norway [15] and (c) and (f) the Sibelius Hall in
Finland (Artec 2015) [1]
elements for the Vantaa soccer stadium in Finland. Box type elements were also used in the erection
of the ExpoDach in Hannover, Germany using 33 mm thick Kerto-LVL panels [1].
Glulam elements screw-glued together was performed for the Leonardo da Vinci bridge in Ås, Norway,
using double threaded screws to generate the required compression forces [15] between the separate
glulam beams.
Washer type screws are also used for applications where large pressure forces are needed. These have
larger head pull-through resistances as the regular countersunk head screws with the same thread
diameter. These are used for instance in the joining of CLT-elements of 50 mm or thicker. The screw
thread diameter investigated was 6 mm or 8 mm and the head diameter was 22 mm and 35 mm [12].
Plywood or solid wood panels are used to reinforce holes and notches in beams. External repairs on
cracked curved and tapered beams are regularly performed. Adding extra lamellas to beams to in-
crease stiffness and strength in (historic) structures is also used [2], [16].
Summarizing, the screw gluing technique is used for:
- Establishing high load bearing connections in on-site construction, allowing transport of
smaller structural elements over the road,
- Structures in which full composite action is needed to establish higher shear stiffness, and
- Applying pressure over surfaces where conventional presses cannot be used due to either
size or difficulty in accessibility.
Economic aspects are not considered in this study. It is however a very important component. The
technique is especially attractive for smaller companies with a limited number of employees who:
- Cannot afford the investment costs that come with the acquisition of hydraulic or pneumatic presses,
- Do not have the required space and facilities in their workshop to permanently accommo-
date a large press,
- Want to be flexible in terms of sizes in which they need to produce the elements.
Larger construction companies however also use the technique though. Press gluing technique offers
both to compete by offering flexibility in production line and construction products. Standardized
procedures should however be applied and methods to control the quality of such production tech-
niques should be simple an applicable, if possible, on site.
Possible alternatives to the production of standard elements are the application of vacuum or pneu-
matic presses. This would suit many types of adhesives that require curing pressures starting at
0.1 N/mm2 or 0.2 N/mm2. Epoxy adhesives require no curing pressure at all. Hydraulic presses are
used for the fabrication of glued laminated timber, where curing pressures of 0.6 N/mm2 are required
for proper curing of adhesives.
2.3 Rules, regulations and product data sheets

2.3.1 Recommendations from standards and product data sheets
Nail press gluing was allowed in the German timber construction standard DIN 1052-1:1988 [17] until
2004. Afterwards screw press gluing was allowed in DIN 1052:2004 [18] and is still possible, by ref-
erencing to the DIN 1052-10:2012 [5] in the current German National Annex of Eurocode 5 [4]. A
comparison of the different requirements set to nail and screw type press gluing is found in Table 1,
[6]. The overview lists requirements regarding moisture content, glue type, used materials, and fas-
tener distance.
The table shows that about the double number of nails than screws were required per same amount
of surface. More requirements are listed for the screw glued connections: differences in moisture con-
tent between the plate fastened and load carrying material, surface roughness, glue line thickness and
temperature of the glued elements. The latter requirement seems to limit the application of press
glued connections to production facilities, not to on-site work which is sometimes the only possible
option. It is expected that all recommendations with respect to screw gluing in the second column of
Table 1 would also apply to nail press gluing, but that requirements have simply become stricter as
time progressed.
Additional recommendations are found for screw press gluing in practical applications: hollow box
elements and reinforcements [7], [8], [9], [10]. For instance, screws with diameters of 5 mm or more
are recommended. They specifically sum up a list of glue types and brands that can be used. These
are mostly one-component polyurethane adhesives (1C-PUR) and should be applied with a minimum
quantity of 250 g/m2. Some recommendations suggest a single row of fasteners when rib width is
under 100 mm, and suggest double rows of fasteners when rib width is 120 mm or more. It is fur-
thermore recommended to keep a log per produced element as a quality control. This log suggests
keeping track of element moisture content, used fasteners, adhesive, etc.
The 1C-PUR are popular as they are colorless, easy to handle, and require only little curing pressure.
The PUR adhesives are a reactive adhesive that cures using bound water in the wood. Once the wood
is too dry for instance, the curing properties can be improved by spraying extra water on the wood
[21]. It is however also suggested that once it becomes too dry again, it could lose its adhesive prop-
erties depending on the adhesive used [22]. Other overviews and studies on the properties of 1C-PUR
are also given in [13], [23].
Under curing of an adhesive, the difference between curing under a constant pressure or curing under
an initial glue line thickness can be made. This thickness is set during the insertion of the fasteners.
In other words, screws would need to be tightened or loosened according to the pressure between the
fastened elements and the adhesive. This is a function of material relaxation, adhesive viscosity, and
adhesive reaction during the curing (foaming and penetration).
Table 1: Most frequent characteristics of the timber structures assessed
Nail press gluing (DIN 1052:1988 [17]) Screw press gluing (DIN 1052:2004 [18];
DIN EN 1995-1-1/NA:2012 [4])
Moisture content: < 15 M% Moisture content: < 15 M%,
maximum difference 4 M%
Glue: for load bearing structures glue according to Glue: for load bearing structures glue according to
DIN 68141 should be used. EN 301 and DIN 68141, or any other similar stand-
Only epoxy-type glues tested against all climatic influ- ard are allowed.
ences are allowed in extreme climatic conditions
Application: Press gluing is allowed for maximum Application: Press gluing is allowed for maximum
thickness of solid wood and wood products of thickness of solid wood and wood products of
30 mm and 55 mm respectively. 30 mm and 55 mm respectively.
Nails according to DIN 1052 part 2 are allowed Only screws allowed to construction standards are
only. No predrilling is needed when using nail guns allowed that have a minimum thickness of 4 mm.
Nail length: minimal 2.5 times the plate thickness Screw length: minimum 40 mm in load bearing
Area per fastener: maximum 6500 mm2 material or plate thickness. No threaded part is
Fastener distance: maximum 100 mm allowed in the fastened plate.
Area per fastener: maximum 15000 mm2
Fastener distance: maximum 150 mm
 Required force per fastener based on area:  Required force per fastener based on area:
0.65 kN for 0.1 N/mm2 1.5 kN for 0.1 N/mm2
3.90 kN for 0.6 N/mm2 9.0 kN for 0.6 N/mm2
When gluing multiple layers, each layer should be press glued individually
Materials: Plywood, particle boards, and high to Materials: Solid wood, glulam, plywood, cross lam-
middle dense fiberboards inated timber, solid wood panels, OSB boards as far
as possibly glueable and synthetically bonded parti-
cleboards
Surfaces should be smooth, clean, and free of dust
and dirt.
Glue line thickness according to DIN EN 302.
Room temperature > 20 °C,
material temperature > 18 °C
2.3.2 Fasteners
The following fasteners are categorized as pin type fasteners: nails, screws, and staples, see Figure 4.
The use of the latter two in industrial processes has its advantages as these fasteners can be inserted
at high frequencies. Processes through screws can generate higher curing pressures but are slower.
The tradeoff seems to be and individual choice steered by producer and press gluing application.
Requirement to the screws set by standards and recommendations is that the shaft of the screw
should be smooth in the added material and throughout the intersection of the two joined surfaces.
This allows the two separate materials to be tightened together. The compression is achieved by the
fastener head, and by the thread on the screw tip such as with a partially threaded couter head screw
or a washer head screw. A variation to this could be the fasteners that are fully threaded, but that
have a varying thread angle along the fastener, i.e. steep at the tip and flat(ter) at the head. This also
allows tightening of the two elements that are to be bonded, only when these differences in thread
angles are large enough. Some other examples are the double threaded screws. These for instance
were tested previously, but tightening of elements was not considered sufficient to establish mini-
mum required curing pressure [13]. This is true if thread angles differed only minimally or if there is a
large initial gap between the surfaces.
2.3.3 Timber and material
The application of the press gluing research should focus on hollow box type element and the press
gluing of larger solid wood elements or glulam. This study can also include an investigation of needed
material thickness and obtained smoothness of pressure distribution. Once results for one simple, but
often applied case are obtained, it is expected that results could carefully be extrapolated to other
cases such as production of composite I- or T- beams.
Figure 4: Overview of different pin type fasteners used already and suggested to be suitable for screw- or nail press glu-
ing applications. Variations of each fastener type can be found in thread diameter and length.
2.3.4 Adhesives
Recommendations towards use of specific types of adhesives are not made in the standards. The
DIN 1052-10:2012 [5] does however includes a reference to a list of adhesives for structural applica-
tions in another section. These must have been approved by successfully passing test of “type 1 ac-
cording to standard DIN EN 301:2006-09, Table 1”. These adhesives can be subjected to temperatures
higher than 50 °C for an extended duration. The adhesives are to be applied according to the recom-
mendations on technical data sheets.
Several studies with adhesives are found were curing pressure is applied differently: curing under
constant pressure or curing under pressure generated by pin-type fasteners. In each of these studies,
the final bond is tested using different standards, some specimens still contain the fasteners [11],
[19], [24]. It is therefore difficult to uniformly compare the capacity of different production methods
and components. Part of this is also due to the versatile way in which the screw press gluing is ap-
plied: hollow box element, reinforcement, repair, etc.
2.3.5 Processes
Alternatives to the screw and nail press gluing methods in production hall environments are the
pneumatic or hydraulic of a press. Hollow box elements are usually produced up to a width of about
2.50 m due to transport limitations on the road and standard plate dimensions. In residential applica-
tions spans are between four to eight meters. A vacuum press could then be used to provide a curing
pressure of about 0.1 N/mm2 over the whole surface of the box element during the prescribed curing
time. Between the ribs and plates themselves, higher pressures are achieved up to factor 7 when
80 mm ribs are used with intermediate spacing of 480 mm [11]. Before the element is left to cure,
bottom plates, ribs and top plates of the element to be glued and assembled, and inserted into the
press within the open time of the adhesive. The press cannot be used during the later curing of the
adhesive. Regular adhesives with open time of a half hour and curing time of three hours could hence
limit the production quantity to roughly two hollow box elements per day. In these cases, pneumatic
presses could be an alternative. The presses consist of several beams with mounted air tubes under-
neath that can be pressurized, see Figure 5.
The advantage of the use of presses is that the visual properties of the elements are excellent. In
screw glued elements, fasteners will always be visible. Manufacturers of hollow box elements prefer
small head diameters. Apart from that, a constant pressure is achieved throughout the whole curing
period.
The advantage of the screw press gluing applications is that several elements can be produced simul-
taneously, where the adhesive of one element is curing, the next could be assembled alongside. Be-
tween the consideration of using either screws or nail to press glue elements, the speed at which the
fastener can be applied is to be considered. Nails, when using an automatic production bridge, can be
shot at frequencies up to 5 Hz. Screws cannot be inserted at this speed.
Figure 5: Example of a pneumatic press that consists of a set of single beams with mounted tubes underneath to apply
pressures over large areas (source: www.woodtec.ch)
2.4 Conclusions
Screw gluing is a fastening method applied on structures that are either assembled on site or are dif-
ficult to produce with normal hydraulic or pneumatic pressure systems. The method allows flexible
production methods that can be applied in any type of company. Through this, the method is applied
on a very versatile set of structural elements ranging from box type elements to glulam beams, allow-
ing the production of full composite action.
Quality of the glue line is hard to guarantee due to the large amount of different type of fasteners and
adhesives available on the market. Current standards or guidelines only recommend screw gluing
instead of nails or staples. With the latter two fastening methods, it is expected that sufficient
strength of a glued connection can be achieved for use in limited amount of cases. These could be
defined. Screw gluing though allows the generation of larger adhesive curing pressures than achieved
with nails or staples, and can therefore be used in applications where higher requirements are set to
adhesive curing pressure, bond strength or resistance to more extreme environmental conditions.
Further research should focus on hollow box type element and the press gluing of larger solid wood
elements or glulam. Once results for one simple, but widely applied cases are obtained, it is expected
that results could carefully be extrapolated to other cases such as production of composite I- or T-
beams.
The resulting quality control has not been suggested in any literature source. Usually, bond shear
strength is used and occasionally, substrate failure ratio is also mentioned. The combination can be
used to know a lot about the final quality of the bond. Probably the most used adhesive today is the
1C-PUR adhesive. There are also many external parameters that affect the curing process. It is also
suggested that these should be better understood.
3 Work Package 2 - Determination of the achievable pressure using

pinned fasteners
3.1 Work package contents
As mentioned before, the individual fasteners need to provide compression forces up to 9 kN per
15000 mm2 to achieve similar adhesive curing loads as hydraulic presses, 0.6 N/mm2. Loads the fas-
teners can provide are rarely measured, so this was one of the tasks of Work Package 2. Until now, the
head pull through strength was believed to be one of the better indicators for this. An experimental
setup had to be develop and was included as a milestone in the project. Aspects that were to be in-
vestigated were also aspects of material used, or if there was a reduction of the compressive load
when these fasteners were used in a group for instance. The work package resulted in the knowledge
of compressive loads for a large range of fasteners types and geometries.
3.2 Measurement of compression loads of single fasteners (Milestone 1)

Two experimental setups were found in literature: either ring-type force transducers or multiple load
cells were used [11], [12], [31], see Figure 6. Focus was on the measurement of the loads in the
measuring range from 100 N to 2000 N, the expected range of load the of scrails up to washer head
screws could provide. This range was observed in literature [6], [11], [12].
The two measurement setups were reconstructed in the laboratory. A ring-type force transducer with
a maximum load capacity of 20 kN was used due to the needed large diameter of the inner ring,
Messtechnik Schaffhausen type 8438-6020 with inner ring diameter of 15 mm. The second experi-
mental setup was done with three separate 10 kN miniature load cells Messtechnik Schaffhausen type
8402-6010, see Figure 7. A minimum distance was maintained between rib and plate to most realisti-
cally simulate the actual situation during fastening, but also to transfer the compression loads over
the load transducers and not over the wood.
Figure 6: Simplified measurement setup using ring type force transducer (left) and two force transducers (right)
Figure 7: Use of the 10 kN miniature load cells in triangular setup to measure compression loads of different fasteners
(left). The cells could be used to measure loads of single fasteners or of a group of fasteners.
3 Work Package 2 - Determination of the achievable pressure using pinned fasteners
The test setup with the three miniature load cells is observed in Figure 7. The sensors were arranged
in a triangle, embedded within the width of the rib. As a total of six of these miniature load cells were
used. This allowed the setup of two separate single load measurements or the measurement of group
loads by arranging the load cells in two rows. The load setup with three miniature load cells was pre-
ferred over the load setup with the ring type load cell. The fastener had to be precisely inserted in the
latter setup and it was less accurate. For both setups, load distribution rings were made to compen-
sate for surface roughness and provide good load transfer from wood to load cell.
3.3 Investigation of compression capacity of single fasteners

3.3.1 Observed load history and data analysis
Figure 8 shows a typical load history of a screw before, during, and after it is inserted into the wood.
The relaxation of the compressive load shows a steep decline right after fastener has been fixed to
the wood. A slight increase in the load is sometimes seen accounted to the cooling of the fastener,
especially seen in use of nails. Typically increases during the cooling of the fasteners are around a
couple of tens of Newtons. A delay of 10 seconds with respect to the peak was considered sufficient
for the ‘curing’ load to converge. In the use of screws, this was a little short perhaps because load still
reduces. A plateau is achieved after about one to two minutes.
Peak loads are usually listed in literature [11], [12], [13], [29], but these are hard to measure and not
representative for the curing loads needed over the following hours. High sampling frequencies are
needed to measure the peak loads, preliminary tests indicated roughly 100 Hz during nailing. When
screws are used, impact is slower and lower sampling frequencies around 20 Hz can be maintained.
Experiments were performed in a constant climatic environment of 50 % relative humidity and 23 °C,
so that thermal or hygro-expansive effects on either screw or wood would be avoided as much as possible.
3.4 Used equipment

The used nail guns and drill are shown in Figure 9. These are the:
- Passlode Streifennagler 6512/130
- Haubold Coilnagler RNC90Z
- Passlode Coilnagler CNP75.1
- Haubold Klammergerät PN775XII
- Metabo BS18 LTX BL1
The latter drill was chosen for the possible torque of 140Nm. This was more powerful than the regular
drills. Along with this equipment, two measurements outside of the laboratories of the Bern University
of Applied sciences were performed. These were done with an automatic nailer on a production
bridge, a pusher, and a wave nail hand-held gun.
Figure 8: Visualization of the screw position during the drilling and the measured load, the maximum load, and the
determination of the curing load 10 second after the peak load
Figure 9: Used nail guns and drill, from left to right, up to down are the Passlode Streifennagler 6512/130, the Haubold
Coilnagler RNC 90Z, the Passlode Coilnagler CNP75.1, the Haubold Klammergerät PN775XII, and the Metabo
BS18 LTX BL1
3.5 Compression loads of single fasteners

3.5.1 Nail type fasteners with hand held tools
An overview of the tested scrails, ring nails, and clamps is observed in Table 2. The table lists the
main dimensions such as length, threaded diameter, threaded of shanked length, and total length. It
also mentions the measured mean values, the 5 %-quantiles, the variance and the expected 5 % quan-
tiles of the compressive loads at 350 kg/m3. The 5 % quantiles were calculated using the Lognormal
distribution described in FprEN 14358:2015, Section 3, [30] see Appendix C.
Box plots for nails are given later in Figure 10. The head geometry of scrails is comparable to that of a
counter head screw and a part of their shaft is smooth. The ring type nails had a flat head. Ring nails
with shaft diameter of 3.4 mm and 3.8 mm, NR2.3 and NR2.4, were used in a straight feed and were
therefore equipped with a D-shaped head. The others were supplied in coils, hence required differed
feeds.
Although expected from calculations of head pull through strength, head diameter does not affect the
magnitude of the generated loads of the scrails. The ring type nail NR2.1 with similar geometry gen-
erates a higher compressive load of that of a scrail and has a smaller spread. Generally, higher loads
were obtained with the ring nails as their size increased as well.
Staples did not show large potential for press gluing applications. It should be noted though that
small ones were tested. Mean values are within the range of scrails and smaller ring nails, but due to
the coefficient of variation of 50 % in achievable compression loads, 5 % quantiles are very low, mak-
ing the method unreliable to apply adhesive curing pressure. Once this spread could be reduced, a
larger potential could be displayed. During tests, it was observed that the tips of the clamps were
sometimes bent towards each other and sometimes were spread apart. The latter tended to have a
positive effect on the achieved load. Staples can be shot at a high rate per second, they are cheap to
produce, and many fit into a magazine reducing the downtime or effort needed to refill these.
Test were also performed using an automatic production bridge, where nails could be inserted into
the wood using either the automated nail gun, or a pusher. The pusher inserted the nails by driving
them into the wood instead of shooting them. This could be done with a pre-loading of the test setup
to approximately 300 kg. Only 8 tests per setup were performed due to time constraints. The loads
generated by the automatic nailer were in a similar range than those shot with a hand-held nailer. The
increasing pre-load of the pusher had a positive effect on the resulting curing load with the scrails.
The clamps were shot at 45° and 60° to the grain, both four times, but differences between these were
hard to distinguish due the obtained spread in achieved loads. Differences in results could also be
present in the results due to use of different equipment. The depth of the nail head with respect to
the surface was measured and maintained around 1 mm to 2 mm.
3.5.2 Screw type fasteners

As presented for the nail type fasteners, an overview of the used screw type fasteners is observed in
Table 2. Box plots with results are visualized in Figure 11. The screws are preferred over nails in press
gluing applications as they are expected to produce stronger connections.
- Three of the four counter head screws had a threaded length of 50 mm. The total length was
80 mm. The three fasteners differed in head geometry and shaft geometry. These fasteners
seem especially suitable for plate thicknesses of less than 30 mm. Rothoblaas HBS had a
threaded length of about 40 mm so that the screws could also be used in larger plate thick-
nesses.
- Heco produces a range of fasteners in which the thread angle varies over the shaft length, with
different lengths, thread, and head diameter. The point at which the thread changes and at
what angle was not estimated, nor was the difference between the thread angles.
- SFS WT-T has about 10 % difference in thread angle and nearly the same price as a normal coun-
terhead screw. The self-drilling tip is 5 mm long, the smooth shaft is 5 mm long, the cylinder
head length is 5 mm long. Total length is 5 + 40 + 5 + 35 + 5 = 90 mm
- The Würth cylinderhead screw had a difference in thread angle of about 25 % between the lower
thread angle and the upper thread angle.
Table 2: Used fasteners along with properties, dimensions and expected characteristic head pull-through resistance,
abbreviations third column: CH (counterhead), VT (varying thread), WH (washer head), DT (double thread), third col-
umn: SD (self-drilling tip), HR (milling ribs beneath the screw head), SR (milling ribs on the shaft), K (Kerto material).
The head pull through values are calculated using the SIA 265:2012.
Geometry Load
Nail or Srew- Properties/ 5% @
type Methods/ d dh L L1 5% Mean CoV 350 kg/m3 Fk,head
/manufacturer ID Materials [mm] [mm] [mm] [mm] [N] [N] [%] [N] [N]
Scrail / Haubold NS1.1 - 3.2 5.9 75 50 129 218 23 106 256
(shaft 2.8 mm)
Scrail / Haubold NS1.2 3.2 6.9 75 50 122 195 22 106 350
(shaft 2.8 mm)
Ring nail (includ- NR2.1 Full shank 2.8 6.8 75 65 222 285 11 198 443
ing shank)
Ring nail NR2.2 3.1 7.1 90 85 308 352 5 248 508
Ring nail NR2.3 3.4 7.4 100 70 203 330 22 164 402
Ring nail NR2.4 3.8 7.9 110 75 399 522 12 325 459
Clamp (tip pull NC3 15 75 - 54 173 48 46
out)
CH / Würth SC1.1 SD 5 9.6 80 50 710 1095 32 628 1198
ASSY
SC1.1E SD 5 9.6 90 60 1118 1548 23 - 1198
CH / SPAX SC2 SD/HR 5 9.7 80 50 773 1254 37 688 1010
CH / SPAX SC2 SD/HR (K) 5 9.7 80 50 1515 1738 7 1086 1010
CH / Fischer SC3 SD/HR/SR 5 9.7 80 50 905 1083 10 791 1129
CH / Rothoblaas SC4 SD/HR/SR 5 10 80 40 713 946 20 668 1050
HBS
VT / Heco SV5.1 SD 4 6.1 70 FT 1047 1355 17 900 484
(60° head angle)
VT / Heco SV5.2 SD 4.5 6.8 70 FT 1099 1469 20 953 601
(60° head angle)
VT / Heco SV5.2 SD (K) 4.5 6.8 70 FT 1616 1806 6 1157 601
(60° head angle)
VT / Heco SV5.3 SD 4.5 6.8 80 FT 1079 1436 19 956 601
(60° head angle)
VT / Heco SV5.4 SD 5 9.6 80 FT 2033 2330 8 1904 1198
(90° head angle)
WH / SPAX SW6 SD 6 13.6 100 60 1698 2715 36 1379 2848
DT/ SFS WT-T SD7 SD 6.5 8 90 40/35 2069 2539 10 1670 3354
(pull out = pull
through)
DT / Würth SD8 SD 6 8.2 120 50/15 2223 2744 13 1772 1035

(based on thread
head, ETA)
The SC3 fastener performs best of all tested 5 mm thread diameter fasteners with a counter head. It
contained milling ribs on the shaft and under the head. The SC4, although almost identical to the SC3
except for a smaller threaded length, performed like the SC1 fastener. The presence of the milling rib
reduces the spread in the compression load. Although it is expected that the mean load would reduce
as well, it is hard to determine this from these tests only. Interestingly, a comparison of the technical
data sheets shows that SC4 has the largest head diameter. SC1E was an SC1 fastener drilled one or
two millimeters deeper, around three to four, than usual and shows that if desired, a deeper head
depth can improve the compression load. The option will however not be optically preferred. All head
depths of the fasteners were between 0 mm and 2 mm below the surface. This was measured using
calipers.
The varying thread screws were all produced by the same manufacturer and different diameters and
lengths were available. It is noted that the angle of the countersunk head on SV5.1 to SV5.3 was 60°
where it was 90° on the SV5.4. The SV4.1 to SV4.3 fasteners show constant results in terms of 5 %
quantiles, although the mean slightly increases. This is probably due to the increase in thread diame-
ter from 4 mm to the 4.5 mm on the latter two. There is no measurable effect due to length between
the SV5.2 and SV5.3 fasteners, going from 70 mm to 80 mm length respectively. Eventually, the SV5.4
outperforms the other 5 mm thread diameter fasteners. It is noted that the variation of the varying
thread screws is between 16 and 20 % and is lower than that found on the counter sunk head screws
being between 20 % and 36 %. The thread close to the head is a positive feature with respect to com-
pression load and spread.
The washer head and the double threaded screws have a thread diameter of 6 mm and more. These
could be used in special applications where higher compression loads are required or where larger
material thicknesses are used allowing a larger fastener spacing or larger intermediate distances. Fig-
ure 11 shows that the spread in load achieved through the washer head negatively affects the 5 %
quantile value. The mean values of all three fasteners are similar. The spread in the values of the
double thread fastener (SD7) is small, likely due to the larger length over which the compressive force
Figure 10: Statistical visualisation of the compression loads

achieved through different nail-type fasteners along with
the 5 % quantiles
Figure 11: Statistical visualisation of the compression loads

achieved with screws and their 5 % quantiles.
is distributed. The SD8 fastener only has a small threaded length under the cylinder head, but with a
higher difference in angle between the lower and upper thread than with the SD7 fastener. Optically,
the two cylinder-head fasteners will be preferred over the washer head fastener with their head diame-
ter of approximately 8 mm versus 13.5 mm, respectively. Note that a small difference in thread angle,
such as seen with the SD7, can also result in compression loads of 0 N [13].
3.5.3 Load reduction over long measuring times and material type
Six tests were conducted with the scrail to test the load reduction over a long period of time. This has
been investigated before and was often related to the peak load measured during the insertion of the
fastener. This approach is different since in relates the start force to the load measured after three
hours. Hence, measuring errors of the peak due to low sampling frequency rates do not affect the end
result. The tests were done using the scrails with 7 mm head diameter. The average ratio between the
start load and the end load is 106 %, i.e. increase of the load is seen. The minimum ratio is 98 %. Lit-
erature often references to ratios of for instance 30 % decrease [12]. This is the relations between the
peak load and the end load. As mentioned earlier, the peak needs to be measured correctly for this
relation.
The load increase after insertion of the load, between roughly 100 seconds to 400 sreconds after fas-
tening, is probably related to the cooling of the fastener. This cooling process results in a tightening
of the fastener of a couple of tens of Newtons. In screw loads, more load reduction over three hours is
observed, most likely due to higher loads causing higher creep rates.
The load reduction was measured on four different fastener types, the counter head screw (SC2), a
varying thread screw (SV5.2), the two double threaded screws (SD7 and SD8). Loads reduce about
10 %, between 6 % and 12 %, during the subsequent three hours. The load of the last double threaded
fastener though reduced 15 %, between 14 % and 19 %, over three hours.
The advantage of using Kerto is that there is little spread in the material properties due to the thin
veneers and that the density is a little higher than that of the used solid wood panels. Experiments
were performed using counter sunk head screws and screws with a varying thread (SC2 and SC5.2 in
Table 2). Higher compression loads can be achieved. Where the coefficient of variation of the counter
head screw is about 37 % (SC2) in solid wood, it is only 7 % in Kerto. The varying thread screw shows a
similar trend with coefficients of variation of 20 % and 6 % for solid wood and Kerto, respectively.
3.6 Effect of fastener head depth on achieved compressive load

For sake of interest, the fastener head depths against achieved loads are plot in Figure 13. There is
little correlation between the head depth and achieved compression load for both tested scrails. There
is also a large spread in the depths at which the nails were driven, perhaps machine related. The ring-
type nails generally show a smaller spread in the head depths, but here too little correlation between
Figure 12: Visualisation of load reduction over three hours time visible through time traces (left) and a bar plot (right)
head depths and start loads is found. Expect for the NR2.4 perhaps. The spread in the depths up to
which the clamps were driven is small, but the spread in obtained load is large. The figure shows ad-
ditional information to the start load only and although little attention was paid to the actual depths
up to which was nailed. Principally care was taken that the fastener heads were below the wood sur-
face.
Figure 13 (left) also shows the relation between obtained start load and head depth of the counter
headscrews. These were unfortunately not recorded for SC4. Fasteners SC1.1 to SC3 were drilled up to
the same depths, and the relation between SC1.1 and SC1.1E shows the benefits of head depth in
terms of achieved load.
3.7 Investigation of compression capacity of multiple fasteners

The group loads through nailing and screwing were tested using a different measurement setup, us-
ing six load transducers instead of three, see Figure 7. The fastener spacing was 50 mm, so a total of
five fasteners per test could be used. Screws are normally fastened at a 150 mm interval. Figure 14
shows box plots of load obtained with the single fasteners in blue and those of the groups in green.
The scrail, the counter sunk head, the varying thread, and the washer head screw were tested. The
figure shows tests performed with hand held tools only.
The mean values of the loads by the fastener groups generally drop, but the 5 % quantiles remain at a
similar level as the single fasteners due to a reduced spread. The washer head screw shows an im-
Figure 13: Illustration of head depth compared to the start load generated for the seven different nail type fasteners (left)
and three different counterhead fasteners (right)
Figure 14: Box plots with a comparison of the load achieved by the single fasteners and the fasteners as a group.
provement if used in a group. A possible drop could be explained by a bending of the material on
which the tests were performed. Although the load cells were close to the fasteners, this could not be
prevented since the fasteners were inserted in one single line.
3.8 Comparison of achieved compression loads with those found in literature

Earlier note was made of measured curing loads listed in literature [11], [12], [13], [29], [31]. Achieva-
ble pressure loads were evaluated according to the maximum load in the measured force-timetrace,
i.e. the peak load was used in the analysis. A drop of about 30 % can be expected shortly after the
fastener has been fastened [11], other values are for instance 25 % [12]. Table 3 shows the mean val-
ues and the 5 % quantiles of these maxima. The table shows that the achieved pressure forces (aver-
age) are a little over 200 N for the scrails. Values for other nails or staples were not found. The table
shows that mean compression loads up to 8480 N were achieved with a 6 mm diameter thread washer
head screw and supplementary washer under the screw head of 35 mm diameter. This is close to the
9000 N needed to achieve a 0.6 N/mm2 pressure during the curing of the adhesive.
The 5 % load quantiles, corrected to a material density of 350 kg/m3 (Appendix A), seen in Table 2 are
plot together with the values available through literature, see Figure 15. The compression load is plot
as a function of head diameter. The filled markers are own experiments, and the empty markers are
values obtained from literature. Note that the values from literature were multiplied by 0.7 to account
for the 30 % reduction of the maximum measured values to represent a realistic curing load. The
scrails and nails are plot in blue, the values for the counter head screws and varying thread screws in
green, and washer head and double threaded screws in red. The lines represent approximations of
the characteristic head pull-through resistances.
The maximum load obtained from the scrails is somewhere just above 100 N. The ring type nails per-
form better at values around 200 N to 300 N. The varying thread screws perform better than the
counter head screws. The washer head screws also provide a higher compression load than the coun-
ter head fasteners, but differences are small and thread diameters are larger. Tests with washer head
screws with head diameters over a large range suggest a linear relation of f = 126 * dh - 427. This
relation gives a good fit, but not plot in Figure 15. The cylinder type head screws outperform the rest
of the fasteners due to their double thread.
Table 3: Summary of different loads through different fasteners. W-Head is washer head, C-head is counter head.
Geometry Load
d dh L mean 5 %-Quantile source, material density,
Type [mm] [mm] [mm] [N] [N] shear load resistance
Nails n.a.
Staples n.a.
Scrail 3.2 6 75 335 270 [11], τ = 4.5 N/mm2
Scrail 4.5 8.9 100 240 140 [29]
Screws
Washer head 6 10.6 140 2767 2092 [13], ρ = 510 kg/m3
Washer head 6 22 180 4080 2998 [12], ρ = 470 kg/m3
Washer head 6 22 280 3730 2903 [12], ρ = 470 kg/m3

Washer head 6 22 180 6030 5116 [12], ρ = 560 kg/m3
Washer head 6 35 280 8480 7215 [12]

Counter head 4.5 8 70 848 394 [11], τ = 5.5 N/mm2
Counter head 5 9.8 100 1400 [31], only 5 tests
Counter head 4.5 8.5 80 591 386 [29]
Figure 15: Comparison of obtained experimental results in comparison to the head-pull through characteristic loads
3.9 Conclusions
The chapter presents a very useful set of data to allows better understanding of the properties of the
different fasteners. This is a great step forward and can help to better design connections and opti-
mize fasteners for press gluing applications.
A measurement setup was successfully developed which allowed the measurement of the loads that
fasteners can generate to join two separate pieces of timber together. A setup with multiple load cells
provided a high accuracy and measurements of loads of all types of and multiple fasteners. The ring-
type load cell is useful for limited applications.
High curing pressures are obtained through screws with varying thread angle and washer head screws
with a large head diameter, although the latter fastener type has the disadvantage of a large spread in
the obtained loads. Double threaded screws offer alternatives to the counter head screws as well. The
achieved load is a combination of geometry, i.e. head, thread, and shaft, material used and equip-
ment. The spread in the obtained loads, such as seen with the washer type screws and the staples,
was sometimes very large and unnessesarily affected obtained loads negatively.
The curing pressures achieved with the nails are lower than expected. The fasteners are used in dif-
ferent applications, also structural, but this should be in combination with high quality control. Scrails
and nails are cheap and many can be inserted per minute. Ring type nails achieved higher curing
loads than the scrails.
4 Work Package 3 - Numerical simulations of the press glued connection

4.1 General
The work package focused on the pressure distribution between the two joined surfaces. The pres-
sure distribution depends on the amount of force with which the two elements are pressed against
each other, the material used and the material thickness. A numerical model in Finite Element Method
was developed with which the pressure distribution could be calculated. Insight could be developed in
the factors that affected pressure distribution the most.
4.2 Pressure distributions found in literature

The pressure distribution was measured through pressure sensitive foils FUJI-film Prescale. In litera-
ture, an application of the use of these pressure foils on pressure measurement on CLT and Birch-
wood boards [12]. Depending on an applied pressure, the microcapsules in this film burst and will
release paint. The downside of the method is that only ultimate load is measured and limited pressure
ranges are available, see Figure 16 (left). To solve this, multiple foils with different measuring ranges
can be used simultaneously. Unfortunately, handling of the foils was very delicate, pressure distribu-
tions were easily affected by material strength of early wood and latewood (annuals rings were visible)
and knots, and surface roughness heavily affected the measurements. Measurement of quantitative
pressure forces through this method is not applied. Other methods of pressure measurements ap-
plied for this purpose were not found feasible or practical.
4.3 Numerical studies and models

Only one known model of a rib and a panel was made to investigate the pressure distribution on the
glued surface [13]. This model contained linear eight-node volume elements and gap elements in be-
tween to represent the glue line/contact surface. Calculations were made for Kerto ribs and plates.
Estimations mentioned that with fastener spacings of 300 mm or more, gaps started to form in ideally
smooth-surface conditions. These were however smaller than the acceptable glue line thicknesses of
the adhesive set by 0.3 mm in this study. Soil-structure interaction models have been suggested as
well but results were not shared [12].
Figure 16: FUJI-film Prescale pressure foil measuring ranges.
Table 4: Schematization of screw glue pressure model and what is represented in the FEM model
Material Modelled
1 Time dependent behaviour

2 Global stiffness upper plate Yes
3 Local compression upper plate Yes
4 Contact surface upper plate smooth
5 Glue behaviour
6 Contact surface rib smooth
7 Local compression rib Yes
8 Global bending rib Yes
9 Screw head forces Yes
10 Screw forces threaded part Yes
Table 4 suggests a list of components a numerical model should contain along with a schematic rep-
resentation. An FEM model in ANSYS® was generated with polynomial volume elements with ortho-
tropic material properties. The upper plate was modelled as a three-phase solid wood panel in which
fibers in the upper and lower layer were oriented in direction of the rib, and those in the middle layer
were oriented perpendicular to this. The interface between the rib and the plate was meshed with
polynomial contact elements.
A screenshot of the ANSYS® FEM model is presented in Figure 17, along with a detail of the modelled
screw. Symmetry planes were used to reduce model size. The screw forces are introduced in the wood
through the force over a surface related to the screw head and the screw thread. The screw itself was
not modelled. Transient, time dependent calculations are made to calculate the contact pressure.
Thanks to the use of the contact elements, rib and plate were also allowed to separate.
The length of the shanked part of the screw, the screw head diameter, and the length of the threaded
part of the screw were modelled separately. The force of the head and threaded part is distributed
evenly over the red marked surfaces, which is acceptable if the screw thread is long. Non-linear prop-
erties of the materials were not modelled as the region with large stresses, i.e. plastic deformation
right under the screw head, were not expected to be large. This could however be introduced in fu-
ture calculations.
4.4 Parameter study

A parameter study was performed to investigate the effect of plate thickness on the pressure distribu-
tion on the surface between the plate and rib. The plate thickness was varied from 18 mm to 27 mm
and 42 mm. Rib dimensions remained 80 mm wide and 100 mm deep. The fastener length was
80 mm long in the case of the 27 mm plate, which resulted in 50 mm threaded length and 3 mm
smooth shaft. These latter two were constant throughout the variations, hence the fastener length in
the 18 mm thick plate and 42 mm thick plate were respectively 71 mm and 95 mm. The head diame-
ter was 10 mm, realistic for a 5 mm fastener. Pressure distributions are observed in Figure 18. The
pressure distributions are shown at isobar of 0.1 N/mm2 at rib centerline and at 8 mm from rib cen-
terline. A total force of 1000 N was applied per fastener.
The top left figure shows that the pressure of 0.1 N/mm2 is achieved over the entire centerline when
plate thickness is larger than 27 mm. Pressure is sufficient on an oval of about 110 mm by 20 mm,
irrelevant of the plate thickness used. This could be related to the chosen parameters of the fastener
tip. The lower figures show that the pressure distribution at the midplane of the rib changes once a
certain plate thickness is used, it shows a sharp tip at the fastener shaft instead of a rounded maximum.
A second parametric study is performed in which the rib width is varied while maintaining a constant
plate thickness of 27 mm. The rib width was varied from 40 mm, 60 mm, 80 mm to 100 mm. The
height of the rib was constant 100 mm. The used fastener was 80 mm long with a thread diameter of
5 mm and a head diameter of 10 mm. The figure shows the pressure isobars and the pressure distri-
butions across the rib, one on the rib centerline and one along the rib edge.
Figure 17: Screenshot of the FEM model in ANSYS used to calculate the screw pressure and a detail of the modelled screw
Figure 18: Illustration of pressure distribution in different direction when using an intermediate screw distance of
150 mm and a screw force of 1000 N on an 18 mm, 27 mm, and 42 mm thick solid wood panel on a solid wood rib
Figure 19: Illustration of pressure distribution in different directions when using an intermediate screw distance of
150 mm and a screw force of 1000 N on a rib with a width of 40 mm, 60 mm, 80 mm, and 100 mm
When using a 40 mm wide rib, the pressure over practically the whole contact surface is larger than
0.1 N/mm2. As soon as the rib width increases to 60 mm though, a fixed area over which the pressure
is more than 0.1 N/mm2 is found: an oval of 110 mm by 40 mm. The consequences of larger rib width
are found in a drop of pressure as the rib edges are approached. Pressures at rib edges of 80 mm to
100 mm wide ribs are negligible. If this also means that the adhesive cannot cure properly here, is to
be investigated though and probably depends on the adhesive itself. Material separation did not oc-
cure which is an important parameter in the assurance of the final bond quality.
4.5 Conclusions
Comparison of the theoretical and actual pressure distributions on the contact surface between is
difficult due to surface roughness of material. The real pressure distribution was not measured suc-
cessfully yet. The simulations allow to verify the choice of material and choice of fastener. Adhesive
will be present on the contact surface with its visco-elastic properties. Due to this, it will be difficult to
estimate whether the calculated pressure distributions are realistic or not. Improvements can be made
to the FE model. The transmission of the forces from the fastener, head and thread, to the wood are
simplified. Once non-linear material properties are chosen, plasticity of the wood can also be consid-
ered.
5 Work Package 4 - Investigation of the mechanical behavior of

press glued connections
5.1 General
The work package focused on the total resistance of the final adhesive bond and the parameters af-
fecting that affected these. The aim was to not repeat factory tests of the adhesive described in the
EN 301 or EN 302 standards. A variation of pressure applied through different methods of production
was prioritized. Also, the influence of gap width between the bonded elements was investigated. Fi-
nally, standard EN 14080:2013 is discussed for suitability for the evaluation of the final bond quality.
5.2 Shear load capacity of the bond found in literature

Several studies of final bond quality were already performed. The relation between glue curing pres-
sure and resulting shear strength and the relation between glue line thickness and applied pressure
[13] using the one-component polyurethane adhesive Purbond HB110. Application quantity is general-
ly expected to be sufficient when applied between 150 g/m2 and 250 g/m2. Too much adhesive can
also cause too much foaming and result in insufficient bond quality. Although higher adhesive curing
pressures were recommended by the manufacturer, a curing pressure of 0.03 N/mm2 proved to be an
absolute minimum to obtain minimum shear strengths of 6 N/mm2. These curing pressures did result
in gap thicknesses of 0.30 mm are available. At 0.1 N/mm2, gap distances of 0.1 mm were obtained.
Gap-filling Phenol Resorcin Formaldehyde (G-PRF) was used in tests in which screw press gluing was
compared to normal press gluing [19], see Figure 20 (upper left). The focus in these tests was on the
glue line thickness. The tests were performed using spruce beams of 38 mm width and 354 mm
length using three fasteners with intermediate distance of 127 mm. The shear tests were performed
according to ASTM D 3931 standard. The material glued to the spruce wood was a Douglas fir ply-
wood. Screws provided the required pressure to allow the G-PRF to cure properly, and that glue line
thicknesses up to 0.508 mm. The gaps were artificially produced and the measured through micro-
scope methods.
A synthetic rubber adhesive (RBA) and a 1C-PUR adhesive were compared [24], see also Figure 20 (up-
per right). Plywood and engineered strand board were joined to radiata pine beams using different
nail- and press gluing techniques, and additional tests with clamps were performed for reference.
Adhesive was applied on the radiata pine solid wood over a length of 490 mm and width of 45 mm,
after which the ply wood or oriented strand board were glued on two sides with three fasteners at
150 mm apart. Through the symmetry of the specimen, destructive push out tests could be per-
formed. 98 % of the specimens with the RBA adhesive failed in the bond line. Of the tests with the 1C-
PUR, 61 % of the failures could be related to the adhesive. These failures refer to the load deformation
tests that were performed, i.e. load up to total failure of the push out tests were performed. The tests
in which 1C-PUR was tested achieved the minimum strength requirement of 4.4 N/mm2 determined by
the Radiata pine material parameters, the RBA did not. Higher shear strengths were obtained when
cured with clamps over screws over nails. The study mentions that the load deformation curves
showed a full composite action and after the maximum load was achieved, further deformation oc-
curred at about 50 % of the maximum load.
Solid wood (SW), birch plywood panels (PW), and laminated veneer lumber (LVL), were joined to glued
laminated timber beams using PRF and Epoxy adhesives [19], [29], see Figure 20 (lower left). These
were held together with scrails of 75 mm length, similar as to what is shown in Figure 4. Shear tests
were performed according to DIN EN 392:1996 and the fracture area was assessed using
DIN EN 392:1995. All measured 5 % quantiles of shear load were above 2.5 N/mm2, enough to exceed
the shear strength of LVL or veneer plywood. The Epoxy bonds showed highest shear strengths, quite
constant over a fastener reference area of either 15000 mm2, 10000 mm2, or 5000 mm2. The PRF ad-
hesions with fastener reference area of 5000 mm2 showed that strengths, almost that of the Epoxy
adhesions were achieved. Generally, all shear load values were observed to be sufficient for structural
applications. It is noted though that some of the minimum shear strengths are low due to erroneous
gluing.
5 Work Package 4 - Investigation of the mechanical behavior of press glued connections
Figure 20: Summary of shear strengths found in different studies using different types of adhesives, gap sizes, and pres-
sure applications. From left to right, top to bottom [11], [19], [24], [29]
The bond strength was studied with screw and nail press gluing methods using 1C-PUR adhesives
[11], see Figure 20 (lower left). The tests were performed to determine if there was an effect of mov-
ing the elements within the open time of the adhesive. Scrails of normal available dimensions and
screws with a diameter of 4 mm were used. The fasteners were used to produce large 12 m. Smaller
samples were later cut from the elements and tested for their shear strength. The substrate/bond
failure rate was later measured as well. Screw gluing resulted in higher shear load capacity than the
nail press gluing. This was also observed through the failure surfaces, where hardly any of the nail
press glued elements showed a substrate failure ratio of more than 60 %. Of the screw press gluing,
roughly 50 % of the specimens had a substrate failure ratio of 50 % or more. However, little difference
was found between the ideal conditions under which an element was produced or the more economi-
cal one, where the elements were not moved and moved between the joining and full hardening of the
bond. All shear load strength was higher than the 1.5 N/mm2 suggested as a rolling shear strength.
The following can be learnt from Figure 20:
(1) Application of screws is generally better than application of scrails or nails. It should be noted
that most bond shear strengths, not only rolling, were better than the material shear strengths. Care
should be taken because not all fracture occurs with sufficient substrate failure, e.g. less than 50 %.
(2) Similar mean shear strengths of approximately 6 N/mm2 are obtained between Gerber et al.
(2006) [24] and Hillmer (2014) [11] for screw press gluing methods with both radiata pine and
spruce, respectively. Reasonable agreement is seen between the G-PRF and PRF adhesive tests per-
formed by Kurt (2003) [19] and Rug et al. (2010) [24]. However, results could however be linked to
each other if gap thickness was for instance known of the latter tests, as the upper left figure shows
again that this is an important parameter in the gluing process: the higher the gap width, the lower
the bond strength is.
5.3 Quality and capacity of the shear bond

5.3.1 Evaluation of the bond
The EN 14080:2013, [32] provides a method to evaluate the quality of the resulting bond. The stand-
ard is intended for the quality control of glued laminated timber, but used here since screw and nail
press gluing are often intended for use in load bearing applications. The shear test methods proposed
in Appendix D are used. Appendix C suggests delamination tests. The former provides a procedure
through which shear tests in combination with evaluation of the bond surface is made. The tests are
easily performed and the minimum relation between shear load capacity and substrate failure are
simple to evaluate. The testes were performed in a laboratory with 20 ˚C and 65 % relative humidity.
The size of the samples used should be square or rectangular and between 40 mm to 50 mm long per side.
The Wiesner test allows to evaluate the ratio of bond/substrate failure by colorising wood surface
according to the amount of lignin existing. The EN 14080:2013 states that the subtsrate failure or
bond failure should be estimated up to 5 % accuracy. The assessment of the fraction of
bond/substrate failure was assessed visually independently by two people, compared, and if differ-
ences were not too large, mean values were calculated.
5.3.2 Performed tests and used materials

The tests were performed using two 1C-PUR adhesives: A more liquid one will be called adhesive A
and a more viscous one will be identified further as adhesive B. Per bond, an application quantity of
250 g/mm2 was used, achieved within 6 % of the targeted quantity. The adhesive was applied in small
strings with a special nozzle containing four openings of 3 mm diameter, see Figure 21. A summary
of the technical data sheets is observed in Table 5.
Three main test setups were designed to investigate the properties of the adhesives: the ideal condi-
tions (IC), the production conditions (PC) and other conditions (OC), see also Table 5. Two different
material setups were used:
- Two specimens of 30/100/600 mm3 (thickness/width/length) boards were used for the IC and OC.
- 27 mm thick solid wood panel and 100/100 mm2 (width/height) rib out of solid wood, both
700 mm long used for the PC.
The timber was conditioned 2 weeks in a climate chamber with a climate of 20 °C and 65 % relative
humidity. The ribs were planned to size within a week before the gluing. The shear tests were per-
formed two weeks after the gluing. 40 mm wide and 50 mm long specimens were cut.
In the three ideal conditions, the pressure on the bond was maintained at a constant level during the
curing. A universal testing machine was used to apply the needed curing loads. Fasteners were used
to supply the curing pressure between a three-phase solid wood panel and a 100 mm wide rib in the
three production conditions. Finally, in the five remaining conditions, uneven application of adhesive
was applied (1x), constant gaps and wedge gaps were simulated (2x), and the gap distance between
the two boards that were glued onto each other, was maintained constant after a preset pressure was
achieved (2x). The idea is important to understand: after the adhesive was applied in thin strings on
Figure 21: Application of the glue in small strings across the board
the element surface, the crosshead of the universal testing machine was load driven until a pressure
of approximately 0.13 N/mm2 on the adhesive was achieved. After this point, the crosshead was dis-
placement driven, maintaining a constant gap width throughout the curing process. It is expected that
this process more realistically simulates the curing process under screw or nail press gluing, than
curing under constant pressure.
In the three production conditions (PC), scrails and 5 mm and 6 mm counter sunk head screws were
used to achieve the targeted curing pressure. It should be realized that the scrail was used to achieve
the lowest possible pressure during curing. It is probably not used as it would be in practice as more
scrails would be applied. The conditions in which the scrails were used were perhaps a little unfair for
the comparisons below. The 5 mm and 6 mm fasteners were drilled into the wood a little deeper than
done in practice. The mean curing pressure is also mentioned in Table 5 on the 100 mm wide ribs.
5.3.3 Test results of the EN 14080:2013

After the adhesive had cured for about 10 days, smaller samples were cut from the large specimens.
Of each setup, 12 samples were selected randomly and all were loaded in shear until failure. First the
ideal and production conditions will be discussed, then the worst case scenarios followed by a com-
parison of different adhesive curing scenarios under medium pressure. Finally, the results of all tests
will be compared and discussed.
Figure 22 shows the results of the shear tests on the ideal conditions (left) and the production condi-
tions (right). They correspond to curing under different constant pressures and curing when fastened
with different fastener types, but at equal fastener spacing, respectively. The pressures that should
correspond to each other are plot in the same colors. Finally, also the line prescribed by the
SN EN 14080:2013 that indicates whether a specimen has passed or failed is indicate as well.
When curing is performed under constant pressure, strengths over 6 N/mm2 can be expected but full
bond failure is not always present. The test with the production conditions under lowest curing pres-
sure all fail the failure criteria set by the standard. The amount of curing pressure and bond line
thickness is dramatic in these conditions.
Table 5: Summary of the technical data sheet of the two adhesives used in the tests.
Adhesive A Adhesive B
Curing pressure [N/mm ] 2
0.1 - 1.0 0.1 - 0.8
Max. glue line thickness [mm] 0.1 0.3
Application amount [g/m ] 2

150 - 300 150 - 300
Open time [minutes] 30 60
Curing time 75 minutes 3-4 hours
Table 6: Overview of different glue tests with ideal conditions, under production conditions, and other tests that were
carried out.
Low pressure Medium pressure High pressure

Constant pressure 0.02 N/mm2 0.13 N/mm2 0.20 N/mm2
IC1 IC2 IC3
Fasteners Scrail 5 mm screw 6 mm screw
150 mm 0.02 N/mm2 0.11 N/mm2 0.17 N/mm2
PC1 PC2 PC3
Worst case Thick strings, OC1
Constant spacing 0.3 mm, OC2
Wedge spacing 0.6 mm, OC3
Constant gap Adhesive A, OC4
Adhesive B, OC5
The strength criteria on the samples produced at sufficient curing pressures are all fulfilled. It is not-
ed though that the shear strengths in the production conditions are slightly lower than those of the
samples cured under constant pressure, so are the applied loads. It is expected that the adhesive had
more time to settle in the conditions where it cured under constant pressure.
Three worst case scenarios were tested in which there was (1) a very unequal spreading of the glue,
(2) a constant gap of 0.3 mm between the wood surfaces and (3) a wedge-shaped gap from 0 mm to
0.6 mm between the wood surfaces. The results can be observed in Figure 23 in a similar setup as
seen in Figure 22. The plot shows that an unequal spreading of the adhesive is not necessarily bad for
the resulting bond. The presence of a gap between the bonded surfaces however leads to a lower
ratio of substrate failure, sometimes of bond strength as well. The samples cured under the different
curing scenarios nearly all passed the failure criterion set by the standard, see Figure 24. The samples
cured under the pressure generated by the fasteners result in the lowest strength followed by the
samples cured under constant pressure. The samples cured under constant displacement show higher
shear strength, but also show a lower substrate failure ratio. The lowest substrate failure ratio is ob-
tained from the adhesive with lower viscosity, i.e. the more liquid adhesive A.
Figure 22: Fracture strength and subtrate failure ratio on the ideal (left) and production (right) conditions
Figure 23: Fracture strength and substrate failure ratio on Figure 24: Fracture strength and substrate failure ratio in
selected worst case scenarios different adhesive curing scenarios
5.3.4 Curing behavior

During the curing of the adhesive under the Zwick 50kN the displacement and the force on the cross
head was recorded. This was used to investigate the reaction of the adhesive during the curing. In this
way, the curing process could also be investigated. After the measurements, four phases could be
distinguished:
1. Application of glue (small strings, fairly equally distributed but not spread)
2. Spreading or settlement of the glue between the surfaces until the curing load (or condition)
was achieved,
3. Foaming of the adhesive, and
4. Hardening of the adhesive.
Phase two is strongly related to the viscosity of the adhesive. The more viscous the adhesive, the
more it was expected to spread. This is seen in Figure 25 (left) where the crosshead displacment was
measured starting from moment of first contact with the adhesive up to achievement of curing pres-
sure. Figure 25 (right) shows the the cross head displacements starting from the point where the cur-
ing load is achieved. During the third phase, the adhesive started foaming and an increase of dis-
placement was measured. Finally, in stage four, the adhesive started hardening and shrinking.
The left figure shows that as the curing pressure increases, so does the distance between the point at
which the minimum pre-load is achieved and the eventual curing load. In other words, the gap be-
tween the two surfaces decreases and bond line is reduced. This is an indication, as the thickness of
the string, approximately 3 mm, during the application affects this measurement.
The right figure shows though that the difference between the initial position and final position dur-
ing the curing is minimal, roughly 0.05 mm, regardless of what the applied pressure is during curing.
In case of the lowest applied curing pressure, the crosshead position changed up to 0.2 mm as a con-
sequence of the foaming of the glue in the lowest applied curing pressure. After the foaming, the
crosshead position returns to the original position and ends at comparable levels as the time traces of
the middle and higher curing pressure. In case of the middle and higher applied curing load, the gap
distance reduces while the glue still is being distributed over the material surface. It is noted that te
maximum crosshead position during the foaming is also found at different moments, depending on
the applied curing pressure. It is not clear whether the time delays between the different tests are
related to opening time or to curing pressure.
Figure 25: Crosshead displacement during before the curing pressures is achieved (left) and during the curing of the
adhesive (right) for three different curing pressures used in conditions IdCn.
Figure 26: Adhesive curing pressure evolution at constant gap distance in conditions OtCn4 and OtCn5.
As mentioned earlier, also the forces measured during the curing under constant crosshead position
were measured under OtCn4 and OtCn5, see Figure 26. The testing machine was first set to achieve a
pressure load or 0.129 MPa, and after that set to maintain the position during the curing. Two differ-
ent adhesives were tested, one rapid curing and one slow curing.
The plot shows that the adhesive still settles and spreads for a couple of minutes until the curing
foaming process starts. The foaming however does not produce a very high increase in the pressure
needed to keep the gap position constant, approximately between 0.01 MPa and 0.02 MPa. To verify if
the decrease in needed pressure was not due to creep of the wood, a third line is seen where two
blocks of wood were loaded under the same pressure, without adhesive in between to bond them.
This line shows that a decrease in curing pressure is attributed to the adhesive viscosity. It is also
observed that although a pressure of 0.13 MPa was applied at the start of the test, the total pressure
during the curing process can drop under the 0.1 MPa. This is probably a combination of the long
opening time of the adhesive B, which allows the glue to spread out more before the curing starts.
5.3.5 Shear load capacity and substrate failure rate

The results of all shear tests are shown through the box plots in Figure 27, and whether the test was
passed or failed in Table 7. The bond shear strength of the case where the scrail was applied shows a
very low shear capacity. This is likely due to the large spacing of 150 mm between the individual fas-
teners. In addition, the fact that the fasteners did not have a large tightening capacity, prevented suf-
ficient spreading of the adhesive. It is expected that this could be improved if the adhesive spreading
was controlled better.
It is concluded that shear strength only (top) does not allow a complete evaluation of the bond quali-
ty. Where a low constant curing pressure is applied and shear strengths over 6 N/mm2 are obtained,
substrate failure ratio is insufficient. On the right, curing of the adhesive while the gap is maintained
constant results in higher shear strengths, but in greater spread in the substrate failure.
Whether the different setups passed or failed the tests according to the EN 14080:2013 standard is
summarized in Table 7. If the test failed on single values, also mean values were often not sufficient.
Whereas test IC2 and PC2 are passed without any problem, test OC4 is not, remarkably. These bonds
are all performed with a liquid adhesive at curing pressures slightly above 0.1 N/mm2.
Through results of OC1 to OC3, it could be suggested that the 250 g/m2 adhesive is sufficient with
regards to the shear load capacity. However, tests with the intentionally created constant and wedge
gap, OC2 and OC3, showed that requirements were not fulfilled. Test OC3 performed worse than
OC2. OC4 and OC5 suggest that a viscous adhesive tends to give conservative results, although re-
quirements on curing pressure have been fulfilled.
Table 7: Overview of pass and fails for the different test setups
Test Single Average Total

values
IC1 Fail Pass Fail
IC2 Pass Pass Pass
IC3 Pass Pass Pass
PC1 Fail Fail Fail
PC2 Pass Pass Pass
PC3 Pass Pass Pass
OC1 Pass Pass Pass
OC2 Fail Pass Fail
OC3 Fail Fail Fail
OC4 Fail Fail Fail
OC5 Pass Pass Pass
Figure 27: Shear fracture according to different adhesive

application and curing method
5.4 Conclusions on mechanical behaviour

The literature discussed in Section 5.2 suggested that achieved shear resistance was sufficient for the
applications in which it would be used, either plywood or OSB for instance. The shear tests performed
in this study showed that shear resistance only does not represent the total quality of the bond. Alt-
hough shear resistance was sufficient sometimes and above the minimum of 6 N/mm2 suggested by
the EN 14080:2013, substrate failure ratio was insufficient. Combining the two resulted in failed
bonds. The extreme example is the tests in which the bond gap was maintained constant while the
adhesive was curing. Highest shear resistances were obtained, but larger spreads in the substrate
failure rate were too.
Although the EN 14080:2013 requires higher shear strengths after the tests (> 6 N/mm2) than usually
used in design (3.5 N/mm2). It should be noted that the loads applied in the EN 14080:2012 are ap-
plied faster than the medium or long-term loads used in design standards. The test also contains a
size effect, where the shear loads are also applied over a small surface, not the cross section of a
beam spanning a large hall.
6 Work Package 5 - Drafting of design rules and guidelines
6.1 Optimization of achievable curing pressure through choice of fastener

One of the deliverables of the project was to draft design rules or recommendations for press gluing
applications using pin type fasteners. The previous work packages allowed insight into the variables
affecting the screw press gluing. Finally, also some quality control methods can be suggested.
Currently, counter head screws with a thread diameter of 5 mm are widely applied in practice. In case
of doubt, washer head screws are used to generate higher glue curing loads. The tests showed
though that design of the fastener head can affect the achievable compression loads. Drilling ribs
reduced the spread of the measured loads, resulting in five percent quantiles being better than those
of the fasteners without drilling ribs. The tested washer head screws, known for their large head pull
through strength, have the largest variance of all screw fasteners being 36 %. It is a pity that a poten-
tial high mean value suffers so much from this unreliability. The tested double threaded fasteners
achieve similar mean loads as the washer head screws, but perform better overall due to the small
spread in obtained values. In current practice, these types of improvements could directly be applied.
A rather new type of fastener on this market would be the fully threaded screw with the varying
thread angle. The plate thickness that can be used best depends on the point where the thread angle
changes. Coefficients of variation in the obtained values during the tests are around 20 %, whereas
those of the counter head screws can go up to 30 %. Larger compression loads can be obtained when
using smaller thread diameters than those of counterheads too.
The spread in the obtained compression load values affect the staple results the most, where coeffi-
cients of variation of around 48 % were measured. Mean values are around those of the scrails. A large
potential for application of these types of fasteners is imagined if the compression loads of the
clamps can be better controlled, either by spread of the clamp’s legs, application of a different wax to
improve the bonding to the wood material, or application of some ribs for instance. The scrails per-
fomed in average, but the ring type nails performed better.
6.2 Estimated fastener distances to achieve a minimum curing pressure

Product data sheets for one-component polyurethane adhesives indicate that adhesives with minimum
curing pressures of 0.1 N/mm2 are available. This is used in calculations to estimate the fastener dis-
tance per rib width so that an average minimum curing pressure is achieved. This is done for the
scrail, the ring nail, the 5 mm counter head screw, the screw with varying thread angle, and the wash-
er head screw, see Table 8. The loads for each fastener type were obtained from Table 2. The fastener
distance s was calculated by dividing the achieved mean load F by the product of minimum curing
pressure P and rib width w.
F
s= (1)
P⋅w
Table 8 suggests maximum fastener distances to achieve a 0.1 N/mm2 average curing pressure to
build box elements for instance. The maximum distances of 150 mm suggested by the
DIN 1052-10:2012 [5] are maintained. The fastener distances refer to a single row of fasteners, when-
ever these are too close, a double row of fasteners could be imagined. Referring also to the pressure
distributions shown in the simulations of Work Package 3, having wide ribs with only one row of fas-
teners is also not realistic as width over which this 0.1 N/mm2 was achieved was in the order of 40 mm.
It should be mentioned that none of these combinations was directly tested according to the methods
explained in Work Package 4. Due to the amount of available types and brands of adhesives, and be-
cause all results within Work Package 2 were available after tests in Work Package 4 were made, these
were not tested. The table does however indicate what a likely combination of material dimensions
and fastener types are that will result in a successful bond quality.
6 Work Package 5 - Drafting of design rules and guidelines
Table 8: Minimum fastener distances along a rib for a curing pressure of 0.1 N/mm2
Fastener distance as single row for rib width of

Mean load [N] 60 mm 80 mm 100 mm
Scrail 3.2 mm 200 33 25 20
Ring nail 2.8 mm 250 42 31 25
Counter sunk head 5 mm 1000 150 125 100
Varying thread 4.5 mm 1400 150 150 140*
Washer head 6 mm 2700 150 150 150*
*Similarity with compression load and rib width tested in Work Package 4.
By using a slightly lower compression load, a margin is obtained to account for viscosity of the adhe-
sive and loss of compression load by the fastener over three hours. As the minimum curing pressure
required by the adhesive already contains some margin, it could also be imagined that the suggested
fastener distances are sufficient.
One scrail every 33 mm on a 60 mm wide rib does seem tight, but also realistic. In these conditions,
screws could be too expensive perhaps and would take too long to fasten the materials. If the scrails
would be shot at rates of 5 Hz, a screw would need to be fastened faster than 1 Hz to outperform the
scrail. Depending on the requirements to production and material, one could image this is an eco-
nomic solution to produce beam or box elements. The disadvantage of the scrails and ring nails is
that these cannot be tightened once these are in the material From experiments, it was shown that
the applied force by the scrail is sometimes too small to reduce glue line thickness up to acceptable
levels. This is due to the viscosity of the adhesive, where it could be imagined to react nearly elastical-
ly on the fast impact loads of the scrail. This was encountered already with a rather liquid adhesive.
That is why special attention should be paid to spreading of the adhesive. In case of the scrail, if 5 %
quantiles would be used, i.e. compression load of 100 N, the maximum fastener distances mentioned
in Table 8 would have to be doubled.
The advantage of using thinner ribs is not only obtained through the higher curing pressures. Often,
slight torsion of ribs could lead to higher surface unevenness. When thinner ribs are use over wide
ones, the risk for large wedge shaped gaps between the bonded elements is reduced. Test in Work
Package 4 showed that these had less overall strength than gaps with constant spacing over the width
of the rib.
6.3 Choice of adhesive and final bond quality

The EN 14080:2013, Appendix D, does provide a helpful way to quantify the quality of the bond. The
test is relatively easy to perform, too. Whether it is the best suitable test method is however to be
discussed as it might be too conservative, for instance when it comes to products that are more likely
to fail due to rolling shear. This could be the case when plywood is used to reinforce notched beams
or beams with holes. The test however does allow for lower shear strengths down to 4 N/mm2, how-
ever under the condition that a 100 % material failure is achieved. Another argument that could plead
against the use of the EN 14080:2013, is that the used fasteners provide additional ductility in the
achieved bond if they are not removed after curing of the adhesive. Even though the adhesive might
fail at a certain occasion in overload, a chain effect or total collapse is perhaps unlikely [14] and rein-
forcements could be provided if the failure is discovered in time. Stiffness might be lost or a panel
could drop from a structural element. Required strength of the bond can be evaluated for each differ-
ent situation. In tests where fasteners were still present in the joined elements, experiments showed
that once the glue bond had failed, further deformation was ductile and proceeded at about 50 % of
the maximum load.
Focus within this project was on one-component polyurethane adhesives. Tests performed in litera-
ture showed that epoxy and phenol-resorcinol-formaldehyde adhesives also offer an alternative. The
first adhesive requires almost no curing pressure at all but is more brittle. This could lead to stress
concentrations in the bond. The second can be used when it is unlikely that gap distances between
the joined surfaces are small, for instance in repairs or reinforcements.
7 Work Package 6 - Transfer of knowledge, summary and report
6.4 Fasteners, material, adhesives, and production

It is important to realise that fastener distance, fastener type, used adhesive is not the complete part
of the puzzle. Parameters like achieved glue line thickness by providing sufficient spread of the adhe-
sive, surface quality of the timber elements that are to be bonded by planing and preventing gaps in
the bond, keeping surfaces clean, using the suitable adhesive in the prescribed climatic conditions,
following a gluing procedure, etc. are elements that are all important to guarantee the final bond
quality as well. All these elements should be managed properly during production and regular tests
are also suggested to assure sufficient quality control. Once this is properly managed, screw and nail
press gluing methods could continue to find application in the future.
7 Work Package 6 - Transfer of knowledge, summary and report

7.1 Publications on national and international level
The knowledge gained throughout the project was distributed through national conferences already.
Presentation at two other conferences is planned further this year, paper to support this have been
accepted.
- Franke, S., Schiere, M., Franke, B.; Pressverklebung aus Sicht der Forschung, S-WIN Tagung
2018, Biel (2018)
- Schiere M. and Franke S.; Adhesive curing pressure for press gluing application established
by different fasteners types, WCTE 2018 conference proceedings
- Schiere M. and Franke S.; Quality of press glued connections manufactured with different
fasteners and production techniques, WCTE 2018 conference proceedings
- Franke, S., Schiere, M., Franke, B.; Press Glued Connections - Research Results for discus-
sion and standardization, INTER 2018 conference proceedings
Publication of results in peer reviewed journals is planned for the course of 2018/2019.
7.2 Project papers, and thesis

The project contributed to the education and graduation of three students:
- Module paper: Desbele Teklebrhan; Determination of withdrawal and head pull-through re-
sistance of nails, screws and staples, Bern University of Applied Sciences
- Bachelor: Thomas Ferrazzini; Untersuchung zur Pressverklebung von Holzverbindungen un-
ter der Verwendung von Schrauben, Bern University of Applied Sciences (in German)
- Diplomarbeit: Konstantin von Mitzlaff; Ermittlung der Presskraft in geschraubten Verbin-
dungen für die Anwendung bei Pressverklebungen, Bern University of Applied Sciences (in
German)
8 Conclusions and outlook
8 Conclusions and outlook

Screw gluing is a fastening method applied on structures that are either assembled on site or are dif-
ficult to produce with normal hydraulic or pneumatic pressure systems. The method allows flexible
production methods that can be applied in any type of company, small or large, in a work shop or on
site. The method is applied on a very versatile set of structural elements ranging from box type ele-
ments to glulam beams, allowing the achievement of full composite action.
Final bond quality of the bond line is hard to guarantee due to the large number of possible parame-
ters that can be chosen in this application. Current standards or guidelines only recommend screw
gluing instead of nails or staples. With the latter two fastening methods, it is expected that sufficient
strength of a glue connection can be achieved for use in limited amount of cases. These could be de-
fined and economical, efficient, and strong structural elements could be produced using these. Exper-
iments, also those in literature, showed that screw gluing allows the generation of large glue curing
pressures than achieved with nails or staples, and can therefore be used in applications where higher
requirements are set to glue curing pressure, glue strength or glue resistance to more extreme envi-
ronmental conditions.
One way forward is to develop fasteners specifically designed for a predefined combination of materi-
als, adhesives and production methods. This could already be covered largely by redesigning a head
geometry for instance. Or obtaining a better control and thus reducing the spread of the obtained
compression loads by the fasteners. Recommendations were already given earlier. A second recom-
mendation is to reconsider the EN 14080 standard to test bond quality of screw or nail press glued
connections. A lighter version of the required shear strengths and substrate failure rates could be
imagined: Once the adhesive has failed, ductile behavior is provided by the fasteners that are still
present in the structure.
The project could not provide a yes or no answer to whether the screw or nail press gluing is safe for
tructural applications. This is seen by the many parameters that are involved. Through the work per-
formed though, likely combinations of material, fasteners, adhesives, and production methods can
easily be suggested. The combination of these depend on the boundary condition on-site, the availa-
bility of materials, and the production facility.
9 Acknowledgement
The work presented in this report was supported by the Swiss State Secretariat for Education and Re-
search SERI within a national research project in the framework of COST Action FP1402. Also acknowl-
edged are Haubold Passlode Switzerland and Brawand Zimmerei for contributing equipment, material,
time, and expertise. Further thanks go to the students who contributed to the experiments being
Desbele Teklebrhan, Thomas Ferazzini, and Konstantin von Mitzlaff. Thanks to all involved person
and funding of the project.
10 Regulations of the present report

It is not allowed to copy or reproduce this report without the prior agreement of the Bern University of
Applied Sciences Architecture, Wood and Civil Engineering. Any publication of this report or parts of
this report requires the written permission of the University of Applied Sciences or may be allowed by
referencing.
The test results in this report relate exclusively to the subjects tested. Information about measure-
ment uncertainty will be provided on request.
This report includes 113 pages incl. appendix.
11 Indexes
11.1 Bibliography
11.1.1 Publications related to this project

Franke, S., Schiere, M., Franke, B.; Pressverklebung aus Sicht der Forschung, S-WIN Tagung 2018,
Biel/Bienne, Switzerland (2018)
Schiere M. and Franke S.; Adhesive curing pressure for press gluing application established by differ-
ent fasteners types, WCTE 2018, Conference proceedings, south Korea (2018).
Schiere M. and Franke S.; Quality of press glued connections manufactured with different fasteners
and production techniques, WCTE 2018, Conference proceedings, South Korea (2018).
Franke, S., Schiere, M., Franke, B.; Press Glued Connections - Research Results for discussion and
standardization, INTER 2018, Conference proceedings, Talin, Estonia (2018).
11.1.2 General
[1] Kairi M.; Schraubenverleimungen erlauben neue Möglichkeiten im Ingenieurholzbau, Holzbaufo-
rum conference proceedings, Garmisch-Partenkirchen, Germany, 2000.
[2] Steck, G.; Bau-Furniersperrholz aus Buche, Informationsdienst Holz, Entwicklungsgemeinschaft
Holzbau (EGH), Düsseldorf, Germany, 1988
[3] DIN EN 1995-1-1:2010-12; Eurocode 5: Bemessung und Konstruktion von Holzbauten Teil 1-1:
Allgemeines – Allgemeine Regeln und Regeln für den Hochbau, Deutsches Institut für Normung
e. V., Beuth Verlag GmbH, Berlin, Germany, 2010
[4] DIN EN 1995-1-1/NA:2010-12; Nationaler Anhang – National festgelegte Parameter – Eurocode
5, Deutsches Institut für Normung e. V., Beuth Verlag GmbH, Berlin, Germany, 2010
[5] DIN 1052-10:2012-05; Herstellung und Ausführung von Holzbauwerken – Teil 10: Ergänzende
Bestimmungen, Deutsches Institut für Normung, Beuth Verlag GmbH, Berlin, Germany, 2012
[6] Gehring, S.; Untersuchung zur Schaubenpressverklebung mit Haubold Nagelschrauben, Ab-
schlussarbeit, Hochschule Eberwalde, 2009
[7] Pirmin Jung Holzbauingenieure; Schraubenpressklebung im Holzbau, merkblatt Intern und Ex-
tern, 2010
[8] Besmer und Bruning GMBH; Schraubenpressverklebung im Holzbau, www.holzmitschwung.ch
[9] Timbatec; Merkblatt Schraubenpressverklebung, Timbatec Holzbauingenieure Schweiz AG
[10] Strathmann B.; PUR Klebstoffe für den Holzelementbau, Tipps für die effiziente und sichere
Konstruktion, S-WIN Fortbildungs Kurs Tagungsband, 2014 (in german)
[11] Hillmer V.; Nagelpressverklebung – Einflüsse von Maschineller Fertigung und örtlicher Verset-
zung, Bachelorarbeit HAWK, Studiengang Holzingeniuerwesen, 2014
[12] Bratulic K. and Augustin M.; Screw Gluing – Theoretical and experimental study on screw pres-
sure distribution and glue strength, WCTE 2016 conference proceedings, Vienna, Austria, 2016
[13] Kairi M., Kaloinen E., Koponen S., Nokelainen T., Fonselius M., Kevarinmäki A.; Screw gluing
Kerto-LVL structures with Poly-urethane, Otawood publication, HUT Laboratory of Wood Tecnol-
ogy, HUT Laboratory of Structural Engineering, VTT, Espoo, 1999
[14] Gerber C., Crews K., Sigrist C.; Screw- and nail-gluing techniques for wood composite struc-
tures, Proceedings of the 19th Australasian Conference on the Mechanics of Structures and Ma-
terials, pp.1023-1029
[15] Sieber, Dominik; Brückenschlag über Fünf Jahrhunderte, SFS-intec PraxisReport 15: 6–7, 2003.
[16] Widmann R.; Sanierung und Verstärkung von Brettschichtholz, S-WIN Fortbildungs Kurs Ta-
gungsband, 2014 (in german)
[17] DIN 1052-1:1988-04; Holzbauwerke, Teil1: Berechnung und Ausführung, Deutsches Institut für
Normung e. V., Beuth Verlag GmbH, Berlin, Germany, 1988
[18] DIN 1052:2004; Entwurf, Berechnung und Ausführung von Holzbauwerken – Allgemeine Bemes-
sungsregeln und Bemessungsregeln für den Hochbau, Deutsches Institut für Normung e. V.,
Beuth Verlag GmbH, Berlin, Germany, 2004
11 Indexes
[19] Kurt R.: The strength of press-glued and screw-glued wood-plywood joints, Holz als Roh- und
Werkstoff (61), pp. 269-272, 2003
[20] Sulze, D., Untersuchung von mittels Pressdruck durch Haubold – Nagelschrauben hergestellten
Klebeverbindungen, Abschlussarbeit, Hochschule Eberwalde, 2007.
[21] Kägi A.; Untersuchung zum Einfluss der Holzfeuchte und ausgewählter technologischen Para-
meter auf die Verklebungsgüte von Fichtenholz mit einem 1K PUR für tragende Holzbauteile,
Bern University of Applied Sciences, Thesis Nr. F/4/D/389/05/5, 2005 (in German).
[22] Beaud P., Niemz P., Pizzi A.: Structure-Property Relationships in One-Component Polyurethane
Adhesives for Wood: Sensitivity to Low Moisture Content, Journal of Applied Polymer Science,
Vol. 101, pp. 4181-4192, 2006.
[23] Kläusler, O.: Improvement of One-Component Polyurethane Bonded Wooden Joints under Wet
Conditions, Doctoral Thesis 22157 ETH Zürich, Switzerland, 2014
[24] Gerber C., Crews K., Sigrist C.: Screw- and nail-gluing techniques for wood composite struc-
tures, Proceedings of the 19th Australian Conference on the Mechanics of Structures and Mate-
rials, pp.1023-1029
[25] Pirmin Jung Holzbauingenieure, Schraubenpressklebung im Holzbau, Merkblatt Intern und Ex-
tern, 2010
[26] Besmer und Bruning GmbH, Schraubenpressverklebung im Holzbau, www.holzmitschwung.ch
[27] Strathmann B.: PUR Klebstoffe für den Holzelementbau, Tipps für die effiziente und sichere
Konstruktion, S-WIN Fortbildungs-Kurs Tagungsband, 2014 (in german)
[28] Widmann R.: Sanierung und Verstärkung von Brettschichtholz, S-WIN Fortbildungs-Kurs Ta-
gungsband, 2014 (in german)
[29] Rug W., Linke G., Eichbaum G.; Vergleichende Untersuchung zum Pressdruck von Nagelschrau-
ben in Langzeitversuchen, Prüfbericht Hochschule Eberswalder, 2013
[30] FprEN 14358:2015; Holzbauwerke - Berechnung und Kontrolle charakteristischer Werte, Europä-
i-sches Komitee für Normung, 2015 in revision (in German)
[31] Ferrazini, A.; Untersuchung zur Pressverklebung von Holzverbindungen unter der Verwendung
von Schrauben, Bachelor Thesis, Bern University of Applied Sciences
[32] SN EN 14080:2013; Holzbauwerke - Brettschichtholz und Balkensschichtholz – Anforderungen,
Schweizer Ingenieur und Architektenverein, Zürich Switzerland, 2014
11 Indexes
11.2 Index of Tables

Table 1: Most frequent characteristics of the timber structures assessed ............................................ 5
Table 2: Used fasteners along with properties, dimensions and expected characteristic head pull-
through resistance, abbreviations third column: CH (counterhead), VT (varying thread), WH
(washer head), DT (double thread), third column: SD (self-drilling tip), HR (milling ribs
beneath the screw head), SR (milling ribs on the shaft), K (Kerto material). The head pull
through values are calculated using the SIA 265:2012. ....................................................... 13
Table 3: Summary of different loads through different fasteners. W-Head is washer head, C-head is
counter head. ..................................................................................................................... 17
Table 4: Schematization of screw glue pressure model and what is represented in the FEM model .... 20
Table 5: Summary of the technical data sheet of the two adhesives used in the tests. ....................... 26
Table 6: Overview of different glue tests with ideal conditions, under production conditions, and other
tests that were carried out. ................................................................................................. 26
Table 7: Overview of pass and fails for the different test setups ........................................................ 30
Table 8: Minimum fastener distances along a rib for a curing pressure of 0.1 N/mm2 ....................... 32
11.3 Index of Figures

Figure 1: Structural members produced with press glued connections, T-Beam (A), I-Beam (B), Ribbed
panel (C), Double Beam (D), Box-Beam (E), according to [1] .................................................. 1
Figure 2: Connection assembled (A), reinforced end notch or hole (B), (C), according to [2] ................. 1
Figure 3: Outstanding example of structures manufactured using the press gluing technique. (a) and
(d) the ExpoDach in Hannover (Boller 2006) [1], (b) and (e) the Leonardo da Vinci bridge in
Norway [15] and (c) and (f) the Sibelius Hall in Finland (Artec 2015) [1] ................................ 3
Figure 4: Overview of different pin type fasteners used already and suggested to be suitable for screw-
or nail press gluing applications. Variations of each fastener type can be found in thread
diameter and length............................................................................................................. 6
Figure 5: Example of a pneumatic press that consists of a set of single beams with mounted tubes
underneath to apply pressures over large areas (source: www.woodtec.ch) .......................... 7
Figure 6: Simplified measurement setup using ring type force transducer (left) and two force
transducers (right) ............................................................................................................... 9
Figure 7: Use of the 10 kN miniature load cells in triangular setup to measure compression loads of
different fasteners (left). The cells could be used to measure loads of single fasteners or of a
group of fasteners. .............................................................................................................. 9
Figure 8: Visualization of the screw position during the drilling and the measured load, the maximum
load, and the determination of the curing load 10 second after the peak load .................... 10
Figure 9: Used nail guns and drill, from left to right, up to down are the Passlode
Streifennagler 6512/130, the Haubold Coilnagler RNC 90Z, the Passlode Coilnagler
CNP75.1, the Haubold Klammergerät PN775XII, and the Metabo BS18 LTX BL1 .................. 11
Figure 10: Statistical visualisation of the compression loads achieved through different nail-type
fasteners along with the 5 % quantiles ............................................................................... 14
Figure 11: Statistical visualisation of the compression loads achieved with screws and their 5 %
quantiles. ........................................................................................................................... 14
Figure 12: Visualisation of load reduction over three hours time visible through time traces (left) and a
bar plot (right) ................................................................................................................... 15
Figure 13: Illustration of head depth compared to the start load generated for the seven different nail
type fasteners (left) and three different counterhead fasteners (right) ................................ 16
Figure 14: Box plots with a comparison of the load achieved by the single fasteners and the fasteners
as a group. ........................................................................................................................ 16
11 Indexes
Figure 15: Comparison of obtained experimental results in comparison to the head-pull through
characteristic loads ............................................................................................................ 18
Figure 16: FUJI-film Prescale pressure foil measuring ranges. ............................................................ 19
Figure 17: Screenshot of the FEM model in ANSYS used to calculate the screw pressure and a detail of
the modelled screw ........................................................................................................... 21
Figure 18: Illustration of pressure distribution in different direction when using an intermediate screw
distance of 150 mm and a screw force of 1000 N on an 18 mm, 27 mm, and 42 mm thick
solid wood panel on a solid wood rib ................................................................................. 21
Figure 19: Illustration of pressure distribution in different directions when using an intermediate
screw distance of 150 mm and a screw force of 1000 N on a rib with a width of 40 mm,
60 mm, 80 mm, and 100 mm ............................................................................................ 22
Figure 20: Summary of shear strengths found in different studies using different types of adhesives,
gap sizes, and pressure applications. From left to right, top to bottom [11], [19], [24], [29]24
Figure 21: Application of the glue in small strings across the board ................................................. 25
Figure 22: Fracture strength and subtrate failure ratio on the ideal (left) and production (right)
conditions ......................................................................................................................... 27
Figure 23: Fracture strength and substrate failure ratio on selected worst case scenarios ................. 27
Figure 24: Fracture strength and substrate failure ratio in different adhesive curing scenarios .......... 27
Figure 25: Crosshead displacement during before the curing pressures is achieved (left) and during
the curing of the adhesive (right) for three different curing pressures used in conditions
IdCn. ................................................................................................................................. 28
Figure 26: Adhesive curing pressure evolution at constant gap distance in conditions OtCn4 and
OtCn5................................................................................................................................ 29
Figure 27: Shear fracture according to different adhesive application and curing method ................. 30
Appendix A Head pull through strengths of screws and nails
A.1 Head pull through resistances of screws

The head pull through resistance is considered to the weakest link in the screw glue applications
using screws. It is a better indicator for the achievable curing pressure than the yield strength of a
fastener or the tip pull out resistance. Parameters affecting the head pull through strength are head
geometry, head diameter, and material density. To achieve greater head pull-through resistances,
washer heads or rings are recommended. The pull-out strength of tip can easily be increased by
augmenting the effective length, the threaded part in the pin. The yield strength of the screw is
normally higher than the pull-out strength of the screw tip. A schematic illustration of a screw with
parameters representing the different dimension is observed in Figure 1.
Figure 1: Partially threaded fastener with counter sunk head
It is expected that the pressure between to elements needed for the screw gluing is best indicated
best by the head pull through strength using the SIA 265:2012. The SIA however provides design
values:
( ⁄350) .
, = ,
in which:
k Characteristic head pull through resistance
dh Screw head diameter
ρk Characteristic density of material in kg/mm3 (= 350)
For the cylinder type head screws, which were also the double threaded screws, the lowest length of
the thread at each end was used to calculate the characteristic head pull through strength. It is
assumed that the fastener is 90° perpendicular to its fiber direction in all the applications.
, = ,
in which:
fax,k Characteristic head pull through resistance
d Screw thread diameter
lg Effective or threaded length of a fastener
The geometries of all the tested fasteners are listed in Table 1, along with the characteristic
resistances and the strengths calculated for a material density of 350 kg/mm3. The Fasteners itself
are observed in Figure 2.
Table 1: Tested screws along with properties, dimensions and expected characteristic head pull-through resistance,
abbreviations first column: CH (counterhead), VT (varying thread), WH (washer head), DT (double thread), third column:
SD (self-drilling tip), HR (milling ribs beneath the screw head), SR (milling ribs on the shaft), K (Kerto material). The head
pull through values are calculated using the SIA 265:2012.
Geometry Load
Properties/ Char. head
Nail type/Screw- Methods/ pull through
type/manufacturer ID Materials d dh L L1 fk,head fk,ax @350 kg/m3
[mm] [mm] [mm] [mm] [N/mm ] [N/mm ] [N]
2 2
CH / Würth ASSY SC1.1 SD 5 9.6 80 50 9.8 1198

CH / SPAX SC2 SD/HR 5 9.7 80 50 13.0 1010
CH / Fischer SC3 SD/HR/SR 5 9.7 80 50 12.0 1129
CH / Rothoblaas SC4 SD/HR/SR 5 10 80 40 10.5 1050
HBS
VT / Heco SV5.1 SD 4 6.1 70 FT 13 484
(60° head angle)
VT / Heco SV5.2 SD 4.5 6.8 70 FT 13 601
(60° head angle)
VT / Heco SV5.2 SD (K) 4.5 6.8 70 FT 13 601
(60° head angle)
VT / Heco SV5.3 SD 4.5 6.8 80 FT 13 601
(60° head angle)
VT / Heco SV5.4 SD 5 9.6 80 FT 13 1198
(90° head angle)
WH / SPAX SW6 SD 6 13.6 100 60 15.4 2848
DT/ SFS WT-T (pull SD7 SD 6.5 8 90 40/35 12.9 2934
out = pull through)
DT / Würth (based on SD8 SD 6 8.2 120 50/15 11.5 1035
thread head, ETA)
Figure 2: Picture of the screw type fasteners used in the tests to determine the press gluing curing pressures
A.2 Head pull through resistances of nails

Nail-type press gluing used to be mentioned in German Timber Construction Standard until 2004. It
was left out afterwards and replaced by screws. Staples were used previously in press gluing
applications too. Nowadays it is only recommended to use these to fasten:
- Smooth shanked nails,
- Ring type nails,
- Screw nails (with helical profile),
- Nail screws (retrievable after insertion), and
- Staples.
The different types of nails are observed in Figure 3.
Figure 3: Example of ring nail, screw nail, and smooth nail from the DIN EN
14592:2012 and of the scrail and clamp from the ITW product catalogue
Where head pull-through resistance is perhaps the best indicator for the achievable curing pressure.
For nails, maximum achievable curing pressure of nails is a combination of the head pull through
resistance, the withdrawal resistance and the fastening method, e.g. hand-held nail gun, automated
production bridge, etc. Yield strength is expected to be larger than head pull-through and withdrawal
resistance.
The withdrawal strength is calculated first for nails through equation:
, , = ,
In which:
f1,k = 10e-6 ρk2 Minimal withdrawal resistance smooth nails (SIA 265:2012)
20e-6 ρk2 For ring nails, screw nails if no reference value is available (SIA 265:2012)
ρk 350 Characteristic density of material in kg/mm3
< 420 Characteristic density of material in kg/mm3 (SIA 265:2012)
lef = > 12d Effective length of nail in bounding material smooth nails (DIN EN 14592:1012)
> 8d Effective length of nail in bounding material ring nails and screw nails (DIN EN
14592:1012)
d= 1.9 < d < 8.0 Nail diameter in mm
The withdrawal capacity can be different if proven by experiments according to DIN SN 14592:2012.
The head pull through strength for smooth nails, ring nails and screw nails is given by:
, , = ,
In which:
dh = 2d Nail head diameter in mm, generally 2 times shaft diameter
f2,k = 60e-6 ρk2 Minimum characteristic resistance (DIN EN 14592:2012)
70e-6 ρk2 Minimum characteristic resistance (EN 1995:2012 with ka = 1)
ρk 350 Characteristic density of material in kg/mm3
< 420 Characteristic density of material in kg/mm3 (SIA 265:2012)
In case of smooth shanked nails though, the axial withdrawal resistance calculated over the bound
material can also be added to the head pull through strength.
Table 2: Used nails along with properties, dimensions and expected characteristic head pull-through resistance. The
head pull through values are calculated using the SIA 265:2012.
Geometry Load
Char. head
Nail type/Screw- pull through
type/manufacturer ID Properties d dh L L1 f1,k f2,k @350 kg/m3
[mm] [mm] [mm] [mm] [N] [N] [N]
Scrail / Haubold NS1.1 3.2 5.9 75 50 60e-6 ρk2 256
(shaft 2.8 mm)
Scrail / Haubold NS1.2 3.2 6.9 75 50 60e-6 ρk2 350
(shaft 2.8 mm)
Ring nail (including NR2.1 Full shank 2.8 6.8 75 65 20e-6 ρk2 60e-6 ρk2 443
shank)
Ring nail NR2.2 3.1 7.1 90 85 20e-6 ρk2 60e-6 ρk 2 508
Ring nail NR2.3 3.4 7.4 100 70 60e-6 ρk 2 402
Ring nail NR2.4 3.8 7.9 110 75 60e-6 ρk 2 459
Clamp (tip pull out) NC3 15 75 60e-6 ρk 2
Figure 4: Picture of the used nails with the names corresponding to those in Table 2.
Appendix B Milestone measurement of fastener loads
B.1 Sensor setup

Several tests setups have been observed in literature. These include either ring type force transducers
or a test setup with multiple load cells. Load transducers for the two setups were compared. Focus
was on the measurement of the loads in the measuring range from 0.1 kN to 2.0 kN, the expected
range of scrails and washer head fasteners.
Ring-type force transducer with a maximum load capacity of 20 kN was acquired due to the diameter
of the inner ring, Messtechnik Schaffhausen ring-type load transducer type 8438-6020. Smaller range
load transducers had a smaller inner diameter of 10 mm or less. Since the aim was to allow
measurements with fasteners up to 6 mm thread diameter, smaller inner diameters were considered
to allow too small margin between fastener and equipment. Since the uncertainty of the load
transducer was 1 % of its measuring range, i.e. 200 N, the expected uncertainty of the measurement
was expected to be around 10 % on a load of 2 kN. The designed setup, along with the actual setup,
is observed in Figure 5 (left).
An alternative was found in an experimental setup with three separate miniature load cells,
Messtechnik Schaffhausen miniature pressure load sensor type 8402-6010. The load cells had a
capacity of 10 kN each at a measurement uncertainty of 0.25 % each. This meant that a measuring
inaccuracy of 150 N could be expected on a load of 2 kN. This test setup is observed in Figure 5 as
well (right). The sensors would be arranged in a triangle, within the width of the rib. The two test
setups will be further represented by the abbreviations KMR20 and 3KMD10.
For each sensor, separate load distribution rings were made to distribute the load from the load
transducer onto the wood. This would also compensate for surface roughness of the timber and
hence avoid unequal distribution of the load onto the transducer or improper loading of the
transducer itself causing potential damage of equipment. The load distributions ring designed for the
ring type load transducer had an outer diameter of 35 mm and an inner diameter of 11 mm. The
distribution rings designed for the miniature load transducers had an outer diameter of 20 mm. The
maximum allowable loads were calculated using the characteristic compression strength of timber
1.9 N/mm2 assuming a C24 strength of glulam.
, = ( − )∙ , , = (35 − 11 ) ∙ 1.9 = 6590
, =3 ∙ , , = 3 20 ∙ 2.5 = 7167
Problems were encountered sometimes with wood being crushed around the load distribution rings
when washer head screws or 6 mm counter head screws were used. For the very high load bearing
applications, additional rings were fabricated for the 3KMD10 setup with outer diameters of 35 mm.
Figure 5: Schematic illustration of sensor setup and implementation of the 20 kN ring type load cell (left) and the 10 kN
miniature load cells (right). For both setups extra supporting rings were made to distribute the loads through the timber
and to compensate for the surface roughness of the timber.
The test setups were evaluated during preliminary tests. The goal of these tests was to:
- Test the production method of wood material,
- Quantify the measurement accuracy of both setups, and
- Perform preliminary tests with screws and nail type fasteners
A wooden beam with C24 grading quality of 160 mm by 100 mm composed of two separate halves
was used. The cut-outs in the material were made through CNC. After production, the depths and
diameters of the holes was measured and found to be within millimetre accuracy. The holes were half
a millimetre deeper as intended.
The load distribution rings allowed the transfer of the load from the wood to the load transducers
were made from plain steel with a tolerance of a few hundredths of a millimetre. The question was
whether these would show any traces or dents caused by the measurements that could affect the
obtained values. After the preliminary measurements were performed, these rings were still in perfect
condition.
The equipment was connected to the HBM QuantumX CX22 amplifier. Measurements were logged on a
laptop using the CatmanEasy software.
B.2 Measurement accuracy tested under a mechanical material testing machine

The measurement accuracy was quantified by testing both setups under a material testing machine,
the Zwick30 available in the materials laboratory of the Bern University of Applied Sciences. The test
setups were loaded up to two load levels, 1000 N and 2000 N, after which a comparison between the
applied load and measured load was made. It must be noted that the displayed inaccuracy also
includes the inaccuracy of the testing bench as well, which is less than 1 % of the total load, i.e.
300 N.
Three different tests per load level were performed to identify possible inaccuracies:
1. Total, associated with rebuilding the measurement setup in any measurement location,
2. Setup, associated with setting up the load measurement in one single measurement location
but taking apart and reassembling the setup itself, and
3. Eccentricity of the load, associated with the placement of the total setup in the testing
machine without rebuilding the test setup or using another measurement location.
The results of the measurements were normalised to their applied load. The mean value and the 95 %
confidence interval around this mean value were calculated. According to the normal distribution, and
taking the number of samples into account. The results are shown in Figure 6 for the ring type load
cell (left) and the three miniature load cells (right).
Figure 6: Quantified uncertainties of experimental setup for the ring type force transducer (left) and the setup with the
three miniature load cells (right)
Results show that the ring type load cell slightly underestimates the loads at 1 kN for instance. The
95 % confidence interval is quantified at 7 %, meaning that the uncertainty in measurement here is
expected to be 70 N absolute. Curiously, the second uncertainty is higher at 8 %, which can occur
since only 6 samples were used here. Once the measurement setup is made, uncertainties of 1 % can
be expected to occur due to eccentricities of the load for instance. At 2 kN load levels, the associated
uncertainties are smaller than at 1 kN. The setup with the 3 miniature load cells shows accurate mean
values at low levels and slight overestimation at higher load levels. The spread in the total
uncertainties is lower as on the single ring type load transducer.
B.3 Measurement of screw and nail forces

Both setups were used in preliminary tests in which the compression force of different fasteners was
measured. The following fasteners were used:
- SPAX partly threaded screw of 5 mm with 120 mm length and countersunk head,
- SFS partly threaded screw of 5 mm thread thickness and 90 mm length with a countersunk
head,
- SFS partly threaded screw of 8 mm thread thickness and 160 mm length with a countersunk
head, and
- Passlode scrail with 2.8 mm shaft diameter and 75 mm length and 15T (torque type) head.
Tests were swift but took longer than expected and will not be presented. The main advantage of the
ring type load cell KMR20 setup was the easiness of the setup and the robustness of the load cell.
This is the disadvantage of the three separate load cells in the 3KMD10, which take longer to set up
and are more delicate to handle. The weight of the board that is to be fastened to the rib serves as a
small pre-load keeping the load transducers in place. The big advantage of the setup with the three
separate load cells is that the fastener position is more flexible than in the ring type load cell setup. In
the latter setup, only one test per setup is possible. When using the three load cells, multiple
measurements can be made per location as long as minimum fastener distances are maintained,
meaning that also more efficient use of material is made.
Figure 7: Illustration of use of measurement location where only one can be used in the ring type load cell setup (right)
and more can be made in the setup with the three miniature load cells (right)
From the measurements other suggestions for the experiments can be made:
- Measurement of ambient climate conditions during long measurements. Unexpected load
variations were measured that were suggested to be related to cooling down of the fastener.
Stable climate conditions can also be recommended.
- The measurements take long, so intermediate tasks can be planned, or two measurements
can be run parallel,
- A correlation was found between head depth and pressure load of the fasteners. It is
suggested to keep track of this during the measurements if possible and relevant.
For measurement of the group action, three additional sensors miniature load cells were used, i.e. a
total of six sensors was available.
B.4 Conclusion and recommendations

Although more delicate in handling and time needing to prepare the measurements, the use of the
setup with the three miniature load cells is more economic material wise and accurate for the
measurement of the compression loads than the ring type load cell. As each measurement takes
about 10 minutes to set up and execute (with 6 minutes load history), the ring type load cell can be
used to be able to run two measurements parallel, or to perform different measurements in which
load level is relevant.
The aimed spacing between the rib and plate should be between 2 mm minimum and 3 mm
maximum.
Due to the success of the setup with the miniature load cells, three extra load cells were acquired to
perform tests with fastener groups.
Ideally, the measurements should be performed in constant environmental conditions. If this is not
possible, environmental conditions should be tracked (temperature and relative humidity).
Appendix C Calculation of statistical parameters

The calculation of the 5 % Quantile was performed using the lognormal distribution described in
FprEN 14358:2015, Section 3. When the total amount of samples is smaller than 40, parameteric
methods are recommended. The normal distribution should only be used for density. The mean of the
distribution is calculated as:
1
= ln( )
In which the n represents the number of samples and mi the measured values. The standard deviation
is calculated as:
1
= 0.05, ( ( )− )
−1
And the 5% Quantile is then calculated as:

.
= − ( ) in which ( )=
.
The last equation uses factor ks to account for the number of samples in the experiment. The
equation for ks is a simplification of the t-distribution. The standard also gives more explanation on
the details involved in the calculation of the 5 % Quantile.
Appendix D Measured compression by different fasteners
D.1 Fasteners NS1.1 loads measured 10 seconds after peak

Head Head
diameter Maximum depth Load Density
Measurement Date Material [mm] [s] [mm] [N] [kg/m3]
NS28_75_ss_D6_001 22.02.2017 DSP_42_01 5.93 13 0.19 171 462
NS28_75_ss_D6_002 22.02.2017 DSP_42_02 5.98 12 1.17 128 462
NS28_75_ss_D6_003 22.02.2017 DSP_42_03 5.94 10 1.47 184 462
NS28_75_ss_D6_004 22.02.2017 DSP_42_04 5.91 21 1.12 197 462
NS28_75_ss_D6_005 22.02.2017 DSP_43_01 5.94 18 1.38 222 480
NS28_75_ss_D6_006 22.02.2017 DSP_43_02 5.89 8 0.99 265 480
NS28_75_ss_D6_007 22.02.2017 DSP_43_03 5.93 14 1.07 285 480
NS28_75_ss_D6_008 22.02.2017 DSP_43_04 5.96 17 0.83 290 480
NS28_75_ss_D6_009 22.02.2017 DSP_44_01 5.88 10 1.21 215 462
NS28_75_ss_D6_010 22.02.2017 DSP_44_02 5.93 8 1.39 173 462
NS28_75_ss_D6_011 22.02.2017 DSP_44_03 5.89 18 0.61 255 462
NS28_75_ss_D6_012 22.02.2017 DSP_44_04 5.95 14 0.52 233 462
Mean 218 468
Coefficient of Variation [%] 23 2
5 % Quantile 130 452
5 % Quantile @ 350kg/m3 106
D.2 Fasteners NS1.2 loads measured 10 seconds after peak

Head Head
NS28_75_ss_D7_001 20.02.2017 DSP_19_01 6.84 6 2.19 227 429
NS28_75_ss_D7_002 20.02.2017 DSP_19_02 6.89 11 1.81 194 429
NS28_75_ss_D7_003 20.02.2017 DSP_19_03 6.91 12 2.04 144 429
NS28_75_ss_D7_004 20.02.2017 DSP_19_04 6.9 7 2.19 188 429
NS28_75_ss_D7_005 20.02.2017 DSP_19_05 6.79 7 1.46 259 429
NS28_75_ss_D7_006 20.02.2017 DSP_17_02 6.72 13 0.87 244 425
NS28_75_ss_D7_007 20.02.2017 DSP_17_03 6.96 9 1.01 203 425
NS28_75_ss_D7_008 20.02.2017 DSP_17_04 6.88 8 0.37 208 425
NS28_75_ss_D7_009 20.02.2017 DSP_17_05 6.85 7 0 226 425
NS28_75_ss_D7_010 20.02.2017 DSP_17_06 6.88 15 1.61 134 425
NS28_75_ss_D7_011 20.02.2017 DSP_17_07 6.72 6 0.04 187 425
NS28_75_ss_D7_012 20.02.2017 DSP_18_02 6.74 11 1.56 131 417
NS28_75_ss_D7_013 20.02.2017 DSP_18_03 6.83 7 1.03 189 417
NS28_75_ss_D7_014 20.02.2017 DSP_18_04 6.85 12 0.71 145 417
NS28_75_ss_D7_015 20.02.2017 DSP_18_05 6.72 7 1.28 252 417
Mean 195 424
5 % quantile 122 416
5% quantile @ 350kg/m3 106
D.3 Fasteners NR2.1 loads measured 10 seconds after peak

Head Head
NR28_75_ss_001 20.02.2017 DSP_18_06 6.82 8 1.99 230 417
NR28_75_ss_002 20.02.2017 DSP_16_02 6.75 10 1.76 280 423
NR28_75_ss_003 20.02.2017 DSP_16_03 7.01 13 2.01 323 423
NR28_75_ss_004 20.02.2017 DSP_16_04 6.83 13 1.72 234 423
NR28_75_ss_005 20.02.2017 DSP_16_05 6.89 28 1.9 303 423
NR28_75_ss_006 20.02.2017 DSP_16_06 6.82 20 1.62 306 423
NR28_75_ss_007 20.02.2017 DSP_38_01 6.9 10 1.6 315 460
NR28_75_ss_008 20.02.2017 DSP_38_02 6.88 10 2.06 276 460
NR28_75_ss_009 20.02.2017 DSP_38_03 6.8 33 1.64 302 460
NR28_75_ss_010 20.02.2017 DSP_38_04 6.91 18 1.77 280 460
Mean 285 437
5 % quantile 222 402
5% quantile @ 350kg/m 3
198

Head Head
NR31_90_ss_001 21.02.2017 DSP_38_05 7.16 20 1.15 382 460
NR31_90_ss_002 21.02.2017 DSP_37_01 7.13 12 1.06 335 469
NR31_90_ss_003 21.02.2017 DSP_37_02 7.12 10 1.27 338 469
NR31_90_ss_006 21.02.2017 DSP_37_05 7.09 14 1.33 359 469
NR31_90_ss_007 21.02.2017 DSP_36_01 6.94 10 0.99 346 474
Mean 352 468
5 % Quantile @ 350kg/m 3
248

Head Head
NR34_100_ss_001 21.02.2017 DSP_35_01 7.42 12 -2 265 480
NR34_100_ss_002 21.02.2017 DSP_35_02 7.42 30 0.83 271 480
NR34_100_ss_003 21.02.2017 DSP_35_03 7.56 22 1.56 255 480
NR34_100_ss_004 21.02.2017 DSP_35_04 7.13 34 1.02 407 480
NR34_100_ss_005 21.02.2017 DSP_34_01 7.4 13 1.61 306 465
NR34_100_ss_006 21.02.2017 DSP_34_02 7.45 24 -1 238 465
NR34_100_ss_007 21.02.2017 DSP_34_03 7.41 18 1.88 403 465
NR34_100_ss_008 21.02.2017 DSP_34_04 7.46 18 1.13 372 465
NR34_100_ss_009 21.02.2017 DSP_33_01 7.44 15 2.26 347 467
NR34_100_ss_010 21.02.2017 DSP_33_02 7.49 16 2.07 435 467
Mean 330 471
164

Head Head
NR38_110_ss_001 21.02.2017 DSP_33_03 7.85 18 2.15 535 467
NR38_110_ss_002 21.02.2017 DSP_33_04 7.9 16 1.83 556 467
NR38_110_ss_003 21.02.2017 DSP_33_05 7.9 14 0.91 460 467
NR38_110_ss_004 21.02.2017 DSP_39_01 7.88 25 1.1 433 451
NR38_110_ss_005 21.02.2017 DSP_36_02 7.93 18 1.47 483 474
NR38_110_ss_006 21.02.2017 DSP_36_03 7.94 18 1.69 615 474
NR38_110_ss_007 22.02.2017 DSP_36_04 7.91 19 1.69 512 474
NR38_110_ss_008 22.02.2017 DSP_35_05 7.89 16 1.41 583 480
Mean 522 469
D.7 Fasteners NC3 loads measured 10 seconds after peak

Head Head
NC15_65_ss_001 22.02.2017 DSP_44_05 n.a. 9 1.66 120 462
NC15_65_ss_003 22.02.2017 DSP_44_07 n.a. 18 1.93 187 462
NC15_65_ss_004 22.02.2017 DSP_43_05 n.a. 9 1.55 75 480
NC15_65_ss_007 22.02.2017 DSP_42_06 n.a. 13 1.67 99 462
NC15_65_ss_008 22.02.2017 DSP_44_08 n.a. 12 1.85 263 462
NC15_65_ss_009 22.02.2017 DSP_42_07 n.a. 12 1.86 315 462
NC15_65_ss_010 22.02.2017 DSP_40_01 n.a. 12 2.34 179 438
NC15_65_ss_011 22.02.2017 DSP_40_02 n.a. 12 1.82 144 438
mean 173 458
5% quantile 54 433
5% quantile @ 350kg/m3 46
D.8 Fasteners SC1 loads measured 10 seconds after peak

Head Head
S5.80_1 30.10.2017 DSP 1.1 9.75 14.8 1.2 1290 430
S5.80_1 30.10.2017 DSP 1.2 9.74 30.3 1 931 431
S5.80_2 30.10.2017 DSP 1.2 9.75 14.5 0.8 1017 431
S5.80_2 30.10.2017 DSP 1.1 9.74 6.9 0.6 1441 430
S5.80_3 30.10.2017 DSP 1.2 9.76 8.7 1.4 964 431
S5.80_3 30.10.2017 DSP 1.1 9.75 4.6 1.8 1307 430
S5.80_4 30.10.2017 DSP 1.4 9.76 4.6 1 810 424
S5.80_4 30.10.2017 DSP 1.3 9.75 10 0.8 914 435
S5.80_5 30.10.2017 DSP 1.4 9.75 10.7 1.8 888 424
S5.80_5 30.10.2017 DSP 1.3 9.74 4.6 1.1 941 435
S5.80_6 30.10.2017 DSP 1.4 9.76 8.5 2.6 1117 424
S5.80_6 30.10.2017 DSP 1.3 9.74 3.8 1.7 864 435
S5.80_15min 31.10.2017 DSP 2.3 9.75 12.65 1.5 1428 452
S5.80_15min 31.10.2017 DSP 2.4 9.75 6.65 0.4 1418 476
Mean 1095 435
628
D.9 Fasteners SC1E loads measured 10 seconds after peak

Head Head
SC5_ss_l80_001 13.02.2017 DSP_02_01 9.76 20 3.24 2009 495
SC5_ss_l80_002 13.02.2017 DSP_02_02 9.7 15 1.85 1273 495
SC5_ss_l80_003 13.02.2017 DSP_02_03 9.7 12 3.76 1465 495
SC5_ss_l80_004 13.02.2017 DSP_02_04 9.76 10 2.91 2026 495
SC5_ss_l80_005 13.02.2017 DSP_02_05 9.73 22 2.77 1278 495
SC5_ss_l80_006 13.02.2017 DSP_11_01 9.69 9 4.41 1685 472
SC5_ss_l80_007 13.02.2017 DSP_11_02 9.74 12 2.59 1556 472
SC5_ss_l80_008 13.02.2017 DSP_11_03 9.69 13 4.1 1285 472
SC5_ss_l80_009 13.02.2017 DSP_11_04 9.72 11 1.71 1467 472
SC5_ss_l80_010 13.02.2017 DSP_11_05 9.75 15 2.41 1375 472
SC5_ss_l80_011 13.02.2017 DSP_11_06 9.73 19 3.69 1384 472
SC5_ss_l80_012 13.02.2017 DSP_10_01 9.74 12 3.01 1374 462
SC5_ss_l80_013 13.02.2017 DSP_10_02 9.75 11 2.12 1836 462
SC5_ss_l80_014 13.02.2017 DSP_10_03 9.7 28 4.24 1767 462
SC5_ss_l80_015 13.02.2017 DSP_10_04 9.72 9 3.65 1436 462
Mean 1548 477
5 % Quantile 1118 453

Head Head
Sk5.80_1 30.10.2017 DSP 1.4 9.24 7.6 0.5 794 424
Sk5.80_1 30.10.2017 DSP 1.3 9.22 3.2 1.3 778 435
Sk5.80_2 30.10.2017 DSP 1.6 9.26 9.4 2.6 1487 487
Sk5.80_2 30.10.2017 DSP 1.5 9.23 4.1 1.2 935 466
Sk5.80_3 30.10.2017 DSP 1.6 9.54 5 1.9 1367 487
Sk5.80_4 30.10.2017 DSP 1.6 9.56 8.3 0.3 1871 487
Sk5.80_4 30.10.2017 DSP 1.5 9.36 3.6 2.1 1312 466
Sk5.80_5 30.10.2017 DSP 1.6 9.3 8.9 1 1435 487
Sk5.80_5 30.10.2017 DSP 1.5 9.28 4.3 1.1 1281 466
Sk5.80_6 30.10.2017 DSP 1.8 9.26 11.4 1.3 1304 500
Sk5.80_6 30.10.2017 DSP 1.7 9.25 4.8 0.8 1061 480
Sk5.80_15min 31.10.2017 DSP 2.3 9.24 9.7 0.3 1021 452
Sk5.80_15min 31.10.2017 DSP 2.4 9.22 5 0.5 1072 476
Sk5.80_3h_1 07.11.2017 DSP 1.18 9.26 11 1.2 1311 420
Sk5.80_3h_1 07.11.2017 DSP 1.17 9.21 4.6 0.8 1561 420
Sk5.80_3h_2 07.11.2017 DSP 1.18 9.25 13.2 0.5 1353 420
Sk5.80_3h_2 07.11.2017 DSP 1.17 9.22 5.8 0.4 1374 420
Mean 1254 458
688
D.11 Fasteners SV5.2 loads measured 10 seconds after peak (Kerto)

Head Head
Sk5.80_K_1 13.12.2017 K 1.1 9.22 12.25 0.8 1844 543
Sk5.80_K_1 13.12.2017 K 1.2 9.25 5.9 0.5 1569 538
Sk5.80_K_2 13.12.2017 K 1.3 9.23 13.35 0.9 1647 541
Sk5.80_K_2 13.12.2017 K 1.4 9.2 6.6 0.3 1746 536
Sk5.80_K_3 13.12.2017 K 1.3 9.38 12.95 1 1876 541
Sk5.80_K_3 13.12.2017 K 1.4 9.41 6.3 0.6 1719 536
Sk5.80_K_15min_1 13.12.2017 K 1.1 9.27 21.75 0.7 1802 543
Sk5.80_K_15min_1 13.12.2017 K 1.2 9.22 8.65 0.3 1567 538
Sk5.80_K_15min_2 13.12.2017 K 1.1 9.3 12.8 0.5 1794 543
Sk5.80_K_15min_2 13.12.2017 K 1.2 9.22 6.35 0.3 1813 538
Mean 1738 540
5 % Quantile 1515 534
1081
D.12 Fasteners SV5.2 fastener groups loads measured 10 seconds after peak
Head Head
Sk5.80_G_2 13.12.2017 DSP 4.1 9.25 20.95 7373 456
Sk5.80_G_3 13.12.2017 DSP 4.2 9.23 18.6 5509 496
Sk5.80_G_4 13.12.2017 DSP 4.2 9.2 20.1 6450 496
Sk5.80_G_5 13.12.2017 DSP 4.3 9.38 18.35 4851 489
Sk5.80_G_6 13.12.2017 DSP 4.3 9.41 16.55 4989 489
Sk5.80_G_7 13.12.2017 DSP 4.4 9.27 39.85 4615 470
Sk5.80_G_8 13.12.2017 DSP 4.4 9.22 20.6 4930 470
Mean 5531 481
5 % Quantile 3701 448
5 % Quantile @ 350kg/m3 3039

Head Head
Sf5.80_1 30.10.2017 DSP 1.8 9.82 7.6 0.6 1030 500
Sf5.80_1 30.10.2017 DSP 1.7 9.81 3.2 1.2 1114 480
Sf5.80_2 30.10.2017 DSP 1.8 9.66 6.3 1.8 1120 500
Sf5.80_2 30.10.2017 DSP 1.7 9.66 2.9 1.1 958 480
Sf5.80_3 30.10.2017 DSP 1.8 9.65 9.9 2.1 1186 500
Sf5.80_3 30.10.2017 DSP 1.7 9.67 3.4 0.8 1174 480
Sf5.80_4 31.10.2017 DSP 1.1 9.78 7.5 2.3 1155 430
Sf5.80_4 31.10.2017 DSP 1.9 9.89 3.95 2 1204 451
Sf5.80_5 31.10.2017 DSP 1.1 9.72 8.55 1.5 1055 430
Sf5.80_5 31.10.2017 DSP 1.9 9.69 4.65 0.4 1163 451
Sf5.80_6 31.10.2017 DSP 1.1 9.66 9.95 1.5 1129 430
Sf5.80_6 31.10.2017 DSP 1.9 9.65 5.9 1.6 979 451
Sf5.80_15min 31.10.2017 DSP 2.3 9.82 9.1 0.8 957 452
Sf5.80_15min 31.10.2017 DSP 2.4 9.81 5.05 0.5 940 476
Mean 1083 465
791

Head Head
SCr5_ss_l80_001_001 16.02.2017 DSP00 10 15.9 n.a. 946 380
SCr5_ss_l80_001_002 16.02.2017 DSP00 10 14.2 n.a. 988 380
SCr5_ss_l80_001_003 16.02.2017 DSP00 10 11.6 n.a. 969 380
SCr5_ss_l80_001_004 16.02.2017 DSP00 10 8.6 n.a. 759 380
SCr5_ss_l80_001_005 16.02.2017 DSP00 10 10.5 n.a. 901 380
SCr5_ss_l80_001_006 16.02.2017 DSP00 10 11.9 n.a. 830 380
SCr5_ss_l80_001_007 16.02.2017 DSP00 10 10.3 n.a. 879 380
SCr5_ss_l80_001_008 16.02.2017 DSP00 10 11.8 n.a. 1365 380
SCr5_ss_l80_001_009 16.02.2017 DSP00 10 11.2 n.a. 1133 380
SCr5_ss_l80_001_010 16.02.2017 DSP00 10 11.6 n.a. 866 380
SCr5_ss_l80_001_011 17.02.2017 DSP00 10 11.8 n.a. 960 380
SCr5_ss_l80_001_012 17.02.2017 DSP00 10 13 n.a. 898 380
SCr5_ss_l80_001_013 17.02.2017 DSP00 10 9.9 n.a. 898 380
SCr5_ss_l80_001_014 17.02.2017 DSP00 10 10.7 n.a. 842 380
SCr5_ss_l80_001_015 17.02.2017 DSP00 10 10.3 n.a. 954 380
Mean 946 380
D.15 Fasteners SV5.1 loads measured 10 seconds after peak

Head Head
Sd4.70_1 31.10.2017 DSP 1.1 5.88 14.05 0.5 1364 430
Sd4.70_1 31.10.2017 DSP 1.9 5.85 5.8 0.8 1450 451
Sd4.70_2 31.10.2017 DSP 1.1 5.88 13.05 2.1 1307 430
Sd4.70_2 31.10.2017 DSP 1.9 5.89 4.95 0 1258 451
Sd4.70_3 31.10.2017 DSP 1.12 5.95 12.1 1.5 1170 497
Sd4.70_3 31.10.2017 DSP 1.11 5.87 6.45 1.1 1365 467
Sd4.70_4 31.10.2017 DSP 1.12 5.88 8.5 1.4 1616 497
Sd4.70_4 31.10.2017 DSP 1.11 5.91 4.1 1.3 1110 467
Sd4.70_5 31.10.2017 DSP 1.12 5.87 10.3 1.2 1152 497
Sd4.70_5 31.10.2017 DSP 1.11 5.86 3.5 1.7 1244 467
Sd4.70_6 31.10.2017 DSP 1.12 5.88 9.05 2.5 1442 497
Sd4.70_6 31.10.2017 DSP 1.11 5.79 4.3 2 1268 467
Sd4.70_15min 31.10.2017 DSP 2.1 5.93 9.45 1.2 1652 462
Sd4.70_15min 31.10.2017 DSP 2.2 5.95 3.95 1.7 1576 492
Mean 1355 469
5 % Quantile 1047 423
900

Head Head
Sd4,5.70_1 31.10.2017 DSP 1.12 6.67 7.9 2.1 1123 497
Sd4,5.70_1 31.10.2017 DSP 1.11 6.68 3.45 2.3 1375 467
Sd4,5.70_2 31.10.2017 DSP 1.15 6.58 14.65 1.4 1274 492
Sd4,5.70_2 31.10.2017 DSP 1.14 6.62 9.4 1.8 1432 498
Sd4,5.70_3 31.10.2017 DSP 1.15 6.62 9.8 1.7 1705 492
Sd4,5.70_3 31.10.2017 DSP 1.14 6.67 4.75 0.4 1336 498
Sd4,5.70_4 31.10.2017 DSP 1.15 6.72 8.05 1.1 1281 492
Sd4,5.70_4 31.10.2017 DSP 1.14 6.68 4.55 0.9 1729 498
Sd4,5.70_5 31.10.2017 DSP 1.15 6.64 8.7 0.4 1366 492
Sd4,5.70_5 31.10.2017 DSP 1.14 6.78 4.65 0.8 1750 498
Sd4,5.70_6 31.10.2017 DSP 1.15 6.67 8.15 1.1 1197 492
Sd4,5.70_6 31.10.2017 DSP 1.14 6.65 3.9 0.6 1412 498
Sd4,5.70_15min 31.10.2017 DSP 2.1 6.71 33.1 0.5 1330 462
Sd4,5.70_15min 31.10.2017 DSP 2.2 6.64 26.05 0.4 1678 492
Sd4,5.70_3h_1 31.10.2017 DSP 1.18 6.68 11 0.8 1412 420
Sd4,5.70_3h_1 31.10.2017 DSP 1.17 6.65 5.6 0.5 1717 420
Sd4,5.70_3h_2 31.10.2017 DSP 1.2 6.67 13.8 0.8 1475 431
Sd4,5.70_3h_2 31.10.2017 DSP 1.19 6.65 6.4 0.5 1845 420
Mean 1469 475
5 % Quantile 1099 418
953
D.17 Fasteners SV5.2 loads measured 10 seconds after peak (Kerto)

Head Head
Sd4,5.70_K_1 13.12.2017 K 1.5 6.67 11.4 0.3 1773 535
Sd4,5.70_K_1 13.12.2017 K 1.6 6.68 5.9 0.4 1704 541
Sd4,5.70_K_2 13.12.2017 K 1.5 6.58 11.5 0.6 1928 535
Sd4,5.70_K_2 13.12.2017 K 1.6 6.62 6.2 0.5 1968 541
Sd4,5.70_K_3 13.12.2017 K 1.7 6.67 5.85 0.3 1777 546
Sd4,5.70_K_15min_1 13.12.2017 K 1.3 6.72 11.85 0.4 1776 541
Sd4,5.70_K_15min_1 13.12.2017 K 1.4 6.68 6 0.2 1690 536
Sd4,5.70_K_15min_2 13.12.2017 K 1.5 6.64 13.85 0.5 1777 535
Sd4,5.70_K_15min_2 13.12.2017 K 1.6 6.78 7.35 0.4 1859 541
Mean 1806 539
5 % Quantile 1616 531
1157
D.18 Fasteners SV5.2 fastener group loads measured 10 seconds after peak
Head Head
Sd4,5.70_G_1 13.12.2017 DSP 4.5 6.67 35.05 6192 481
Sd4,5.70_G_2 13.12.2017 DSP 4.5 6.68 18.4 6571 481
Sd4,5.70_G_3 13.12.2017 DSP 4.6 6.58 21.35 6046 457
Sd4,5.70_G_4 13.12.2017 DSP 4.6 6.62 23.85 6900 457
Sd4,5.70_G_5 13.12.2017 DSP 4.7 6.62 18 5689 474
Sd4,5.70_G_6 13.12.2017 DSP 4.7 6.67 19.4 6601 474
Sd4,5.70_G_7 13.12.2017 DSP 4.8 6.72 20.9 6162 470
Sd4,5.70_G_8 13.12.2017 DSP 4.8 6.68 26.15 6390 470
Mean 6319 470
5 % Quantile 5534 5534
4523

Head Head
Sd4,5.80_1 31.10.2017 DSP 1.16 6.74 9 0.9 1463 448
Sd4,5.80_1 31.10.2017 DSP 1.13 6.72 4.55 2.2 1403 430
Sd4,5.80_2 31.10.2017 DSP 1.16 6.76 9.65 2.1 1311 448
Sd4,5.80_2 31.10.2017 DSP 1.13 6.7 4.4 0.5 1622 430
Sd4,5.80_3 31.10.2017 DSP 1.16 6.71 7.9 1.2 1394 448
Sd4,5.80_3 31.10.2017 DSP 1.13 6.72 4.3 0.9 1182 430
Sd4,5.80_4 31.10.2017 DSP 1.16 6.7 9.4 1.2 1373 448
Sd4,5.80_4 31.10.2017 DSP 1.13 6.68 5.4 0.8 1129 430
Sd4,5.80_5 31.10.2017 DSP 1.16 6.74 7.65 1.2 1643 448
Sd4,5.80_5 31.10.2017 DSP 1.13 6.69 3.75 1.6 1260 430
Sd4,5.80_6 31.10.2017 DSP 1.16 6.65 7.6 1 1482 448
Sd4,5.80_6 31.10.2017 DSP 1.13 6.61 4 0 1494 430
Sd4,5.80_15min 31.10.2017 DSP 2.1 6.61 16.5 1 1402 462
Sd4,5.80_15min 31.10.2017 DSP 2.2 6.6 8.15 0.8 1948 492
Mean 1436 444
5 % Quantile 1078 407
956

Head Head
SCh5_ss_l80_001_001 16.02.2017 DSP00 9.6 11.8 -1 2349 380
SCh5_ss_l80_001_002 16.02.2017 DSP00 9.6 9.6 -1 2457 380
SCh5_ss_l80_001_003 16.02.2017 DSP00 9.6 10.8 -1 2168 380
SCh5_ss_l80_001_004 16.02.2017 DSP00 9.6 10.6 -1 2471 380
SCh5_ss_l80_001_005 16.02.2017 DSP00 9.6 10.6 -1 2416 380
SCh5_ss_l80_001_006 16.02.2017 DSP00 9.6 11.5 -1 2038 380
SCh5_ss_l80_001_007 17.02.2017 DSP00 9.6 10 -1 2347 380
SCh5_ss_l80_001_008 17.02.2017 DSP00 9.6 9.1 -1 2220 380
SCh5_ss_l80_001_009 17.02.2017 DSP00 9.6 9.5 -1 2555 380
SCh5_ss_l80_001_010 17.02.2017 DSP00 9.6 8.2 -1 2324 380
SCh5_ss_l80_001_011 17.02.2017 DSP00 9.6 14.1 -1 2508 380
SCh5_ss_l80_001_012 17.02.2017 DSP00 9.6 9.4 -1 2232 380
SCh5_ss_l80_001_013 17.02.2017 DSP00 9.6 14.6 -1 2176 380
SCh5_ss_l80_001_014 17.02.2017 DSP00 9.6 9.2 -1 2518 380
SCh5_ss_l80_001_015 17.02.2017 DSP00 9.6 9.6 -1 2167 380
Mean 2330 380
5 % Quantile 2033 380
5 % Quantile @ 350kg/m3 1903
D.21 Fasteners SW6 loads measured 10 seconds after peak

Head Head
diameter Maximum depth Density
Measurement Date Material [mm] [s] [mm] Load [N] [kg/m3]
T6.100_1 31.10.2017 MH 3.2 13.42 17.95 0.5 2140 459
T6.100_1 31.10.2017 MH 3.1 13.41 8.9 0.8 2248 460
T6.100_2 31.10.2017 MH 3.2 13.4 17.75 0.2 2002 459
T6.100_2 31.10.2017 MH 3.1 13.46 8.7 0.6 2023 460
T6.100_3 31.10.2017 MH 3.2 13.38 14.05 3.5 2518 459
T6.100_3 31.10.2017 MH 3.1 13.31 6.6 1.8 2646 460
T6.100_4 01.11.2017 MH 3.4 13.32 15.75 0.8 3437 469
T6.100_4 01.11.2017 MH 3.3 13.19 7.45 0.5 3339 465
T6.100_5 01.11.2017 MH 3.4 13.43 15.6 0.6 3604 469
T6.100_5 01.11.2017 MH 3.3 13.37 8.35 0.4 3441 465
T6.100_6 01.11.2017 MH 3.4 13.41 16.05 0.5 2382 469
T6.100_6 01.11.2017 MH 3.3 13.34 7.4 0.6 2138 465
T6.100_15min 31.10.2017 MH 3.14 13.42 14.5 0.8 3538 477
T6.100_15min 31.10.2017 MH 3.13 13.41 7.3 0.6 2550 473
Mean 2715 465
5 % Quantile 1698 454
1379
D.22 Fasteners SW6 fastener group loads measured 10 seconds after peak
Head Head
T6.100_G_1 13.12.2017 MH 5.1 13.42 37.45 10709 479
T6.100_G_2 13.12.2017 MH 5.2 13.41 35.6 10620 482
T6.100_G_3 13.12.2017 MH 5.3 13.4 35.9 10559 470
T6.100_G_4 13.12.2017 MH 5.4 13.46 49.25 11565 475
T6.100_G_6_verst 13.12.2017 MH 5.6 13.31 33.45 13353 469
T6.100_G_7_verst 13.12.2017 MH 5.7 13.32 35.6 11457 479
T6.100_G_8_verst 13.12.2017 MH 5.8 13.19 29.05 11587 482
Mean 11407 476
5 % Quantile @ 350kg/m3 7527
D.23 Fasteners SD7 loads measured 10 seconds after peak

Head Head
D6,5.90_1 01.11.2017 MH 3.1 7.99 15.55 0.1 2467 460
D6,5.90_1 01.11.2017 MH 3.9 7.99 7.6 0 2364 464
D6,5.90_2 01.11.2017 MH 3.1 7.95 14.6 0.2 2683 460
D6,5.90_2 01.11.2017 MH 3.9 8.08 6.8 -0.2 2497 464
D6,5.90_3 01.11.2017 MH 3.1 8.07 12.6 0.2 2493 460
D6,5.90_3 01.11.2017 MH 3.9 7.9 5.45 0.4 2347 464
D6,5.90_4 01.11.2017 MH 3.12 8.01 6.6 0.5 2216 474
D6,5.90_4 01.11.2017 MH 3.11 7.95 13.95 0.6 2396 468
D6,5.90_5 01.11.2017 MH 3.12 7.99 13.25 0.3 2355 474
D6,5.90_5 01.11.2017 MH 3.11 8 6.05 0.4 2317 468
D6,5.90_6 01.11.2017 MH 3.12 8.02 14.65 0.2 2594 474
D6,5.90_6 01.11.2017 MH 3.11 7.94 6 0.3 2258 468
D6,5.90_15min 01.11.2017 MH 3.14 7.95 17.85 0 2914 477
D6,5.90_15min 01.11.2017 MH 3.13 8.08 8.1 0.2 2043 473
D6,5.90_3h_1 07.11.2017 MH 3.16 8.04 17.8 0.6 2564 470
D6,5.90_3h_1 07.11.2017 MH 3.15 8.08 9.8 0.2 2513 470
Mean 2439 468
5 % Quantile 2069 457
5 % Quantile @ 350kg/m3 1670
D.24 Fasteners SD8 loads measured 10 seconds after peak

Head Head
diameter Maximum depth Density
Measurement Date Material [mm] [s] [mm] Load [N] [kg/m3]
D6.120_1 01.11.2017 MH 3.6 9.13 25.55 0.8 3376 473
D6.120_1 01.11.2017 MH 3.5 9.14 10.1 0.6 3059 471
D6.120_2 01.11.2017 MH 3.6 9.09 16.7 0.8 3103 473
D6.120_2 01.11.2017 MH 3.5 9.1 8.25 0.4 3230 471
D6.120_3 01.11.2017 MH 3.6 9.11 13.85 0.5 2639 473
D6.120_3 01.11.2017 MH 3.5 9.12 6.45 0.3 2603 471
D6.120_4 01.11.2017 MH 3.8 9.09 14.75 0.5 2325 467
D6.120_4 01.11.2017 MH 3.7 9.11 7.05 0.6 2550 479
D6.120_5 01.11.2017 MH 3.8 9.16 15.95 0.3 2685 467
D6.120_5 01.11.2017 MH 3.7 9.02 7 0.6 2511 479
D6.120_6 01.11.2017 MH 3.8 9.15 15.3 0.8 2890 467
D6.120_6 01.11.2017 MH 3.7 9.16 7.55 0.4 2723 479
D6.120_15min 01.11.2017 MH 3.14 9.13 20.3 0.5 2343 477
D6.120_15min 01.11.2017 MH 3.13 9.14 12.4 0.8 2778 473
D6.120_3h_1 01.11.2017 MH 3.16 9.13 23.2 0.5 2882 470
D6.120_3h_1 01.11.2017 MH 3.15 9.14 10.4 0.3 2573 470
D6.120_3h_2 02.11.2017 MH 3.16 9.14 18.8 0.4 2430 470
D6.120_3h_2 02.11.2017 MH 3.15 9.15 9.4 0.2 2685 470
Mean 2744 472
5 % Quantile 2223 465
1772
Appendix E Experiments Brawand

This chapter includes the original content of the report about the investigation at Brawand,
Grindelwald-CH, aimed to use the pusher technologie for the press gluing connections. Scrails and
staples have been used.
E.1 Einleitung
Das Institut für Holzbau, Tragwerke, und Architektur der Berner Fachhochschule bearbeitet ein COST-
Projekt (SERI C15.0052), welches das Ziel hat, die Pressverklebung mittels Schrauben, Nägeln oder
Klammern zu untersuchen. Pressverklebung ist eine breit verwendete Methode um Stege und Platten
statisch mit einander zu verbinden. Klebstoffe empfehlen einen minimalen Pressdruck, der während
des Aushärtens mittels Pressen oder Verbindungsmitteln garantiert werden muss. Teilweise sind vom
Klebstoffhersteller auch minimale Fugendicken angegeben.
Verbindungsmittel, die im Moment in Pressverklebungsverfahren verwendet werden, sind Nägel und
Schrauben. Gemeinsam mit der Brawand Zimmerei in Grindelwald wurden experimentelle
Untersuchungen durchgeführt, um die Presskraft von Nagelschrauben und Klammern im
Praxiseinsatz, speziell unter der Verwendung eines Abbundportals, wo Verbindungsmittel maschinell
eingeschossen oder mittels Pusher eingedrückt werden können, zu messen. Die Tests sind innerhalb
des Arbeitspakets 2 des COST-Projekts ausgeführt. Dieser Bericht beschreibt den Messaufbau,
Prüfablauf, Ergebnisse, und ein weiteres Vorgehen. Als Vorbereitung für die Prüfungen wurde ein
Dokument „Testzweck Verwendung Pusher“ aufgestellt.
E.2 Prüfaufbau und Messtechnik

Am Samstag 30. September 2017 wurden die Tests durchgeführt. Der Messaufbau wurde mit der
Brawand Zimmerei entwickelt. In einem Steg wurden drei Kraftmessdosen versenkt worauf eine Platte
gelegt wurde, siehe Abbildung 1. Zwei Stahldübel in der oberen Platte und in den Aussenstegen
dienten zur Lagesicherung. Anschliessend wurden die Platte und der Steg mittels eines Nagels oder
Klammer miteinander verbunden. Pro Mittelsteg waren 22 Messstellen verfügbar. Pro Messaufbau
konnten gleichzeitig zwei Prüfungen durchgeführt werden, siehe auch Tabelle 1. Die Presskraft von
jedem Verbindungsmittel wurde mindestens 5 Minuten gemessen und wo möglich eine
Langzeitmessung von mindestens 15 Minuten durchgeführt. Abbildung 1 zeigt den Prüfaufbau an
einer Messstelle. Die Presskraft der Verbindungsmittel wurde auf dem Mittelsteg mit den drei
versenkten Miniaturkraftmessdosen Typ 8402 6010 zwischen Unterlegscheiben von 35 mm
Durchmesser gemessen. Die Datenerfassung erfolgte mittels einem Quantum-CX22 Messverstärker
und Catman-Software auf einen Laptop mit einer Messfrequenz von 20 Hz.
Das Hauptziel der Tests war, die Presskraft zu ermitteln, die die Nagelschrauben während des
Aushärtens der Klebstoffe liefern können. Brawand Zimmerei wünschte auch Klammern zu prüfen. Da
die Verfügbarkeit der Abbundanlage beschränkt war, wurden nur vier Serien mit acht
Verbindungsmitteln pro Serie geplant. Die durchgeführten Serien waren:
1. Eingeschossene Nagelschrauben (8x) ohne Vorpresskraft + Langzeitmessung 30 min (2x)
2. Eingedrückte Nagelschrauben mit Pusher (8x), ≈ 1.5 kN (150 kg) Vorpresskraft
3. Eingedrückte Nagelschrauben mit Pusher (8x), ≈ 2.75 kN (275 kg) Vorpresskraft +
Langzeitmessung 30 min (2x)
4. Eingeschossene Klammern (8x), 4x 45° und 4x 60° zur Faser-Deck-Richtung
Zusätzlich wurden Schraubengruppen und die Presskräfte von handgeschraubten Tellerkopfschrauben
(6 mm und 8 mm Durchmesser) und Rillennägeln (2.8 mm Durchmesser und 60 mm Länge) geprüft.
Die Nagelschrauben hatten einen Durchmesser von 2.8 mm und eine Länge von 75 mm. Die
Klammern hatten eine Breite von 15 mm und eine Länge von 65 mm. Die Vorpresskraft des Pushers
konnte bis 300 kg erhöht werden. Das Verhältnis zwischen Öldruck im Puscher und resultierender
Vorpresskraft wurde in vorgängigen Prüfungen ermittelt.
Messverstärker
Dreischichtplatte
Position der
Verbindungsmittel
Stahldübel zur
Lagesicherung
Stahldübel zur
Lagesicherung
Kraftmessdosen und
Unterlegscheiben im
Mittelsteg
Abbildung 1: Prüfaufbau der Hohlkastenelemente mit Dreischichtplatten, drei Kraftmessdosen und zwei Stahldübel in
den Aussenstegen zur Lagesicherung
Tabelle 1: Prüfablauf mit Verbindungsmittel, evt. Vorpresskraft und Messstelle (NS = Nagelschraube)
Mittelsteg 1 Verbindungsmittel Vorpresskraft/Methode Messstelle Messstelle

Prüfung 1 Einzel NS 157 kg Langzeit 1 9
Prüfung 2 Einzel NS 157 kg 3 11
Prüfung 6 Einzel NS 257 kg Langzeit 4 12
Prüfung 9 Gruppe 50 mm NS 257 kg KMD Stelle 18 - 23
Prüfung 10 Tellerkopfschrauben Akkuschrauber Unb.
Mittelsteg 2 Verbindungsmittel Vorpresskraft/Methode Messstelle Messstelle

Prüfung 1 Einzel NS Geschossen 1 9
Prüfung 3 Einzel NS Geschossen Langzeit 5 13
Prüfung 5 Klammer Geschossen 2 10
Prüfung 9 Gruppe 50 mm NS Geschossen KMD stelle 18 - 23
Prüfung 10 Rillennagel 60 mm Geschossen 17
E.3 Vorpresskraft des Pushers

Das Verhältnis zwischen Druck und Vorpresskraft des Pushers wurde vor den Tests ermittelt. Hierfür
wurde der gleiche Aufbau verwendet, allerdings ohne Einbringen eines Verbindungsmittels. Die
Ergebnisse sind in Abbildung 2 dargestellt und geben eine gute Schätzung ab. Für eine Vorpresskraft
von 157 kg und 275 kg (≈1570 N und 2750 N), wurden ein Druck von 3.2 bar und 6.8 bar im Puscher
eingestellt. Die Standardeinstellung des Pushers, mit der eine Vorpresskraft von 100 kg gemessen
wurde, betrug ca. 2.2 bar.
3000
Vorpresskraft Puscher [N]
2500
2000
1500
1000
500 genauer Druck unbekannt

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Druck [bar]
Abbildung 2: Verhältnis zwischen Druck und Vorpresskraft der Pusher.
E.4 Auswertung der Ergebnisse

Ein typischer Kraftverlauf während der Prüfung mit dem Pusher bei einer Vorpresskraft von 157 kg ist
in Abbildung 3 dargestellt. Das Diagramm zeigt, dass zwischen dem Einbringen der
Verbindungsmittel ca. 30 s gewartet wurde, um die Presskraft 10 s nach dem Einbringen auswerten zu
können (schwarze Kreise), ohne dass die Messung von der zweiten Stelle beeinflusst wurde. Die
Vorpresskraft des Puschers von ca. 157 kg ist auch im Diagramm ersichtlich.
Abbildung 3: Typische Kraftmessreihe von zwei Verbindungsmitteln während der Prüfungen; die Presskraft wurde 10 s
nach dem Einbringen der Verbindungsmittel ermittelt
E.5 Erreichte Presskräfte von Nagelschrauben und Klammer

Abbildung 4 zeigt, dass eine positive Abhängigkeit zwischen der Vorpresskraft des Pushers und der
gemessenen Presskraft der Nagelschrauben (grünen Kreise) besteht. Für einer Vorpresskraft von
257 kg verdoppelt sich die Presskraft der Nagelschraube im Vergleich zur geschossenen
Nagelschraube. Mit den Klammern (blaue Vierecke) konnten nur sehr geringe Presskräfte von 98 N
pro Verbindungsmittel als Durchschnittswert von acht Versuchen erreicht werden. Der Winkel zur
Faser der Decklage von 45˚ oder 60˚ wurde nicht getrennt betrachtet. Der geschossene Rillennagel
(rote Dreieck) erreichte eine Presskraft von 156 N, vergleichbar mit geschossenen Nagelschrauben.
Ein sehr tief gemessener Wert (Ausreisser) der Nagelschrauben, der mit einer Vorpresskraft von
157 kg eingebracht wurden, wurde in der Auswertung vernachlässigt. Diese Nagelschraube war nicht
tief genug ins Holz eingedrückt, obwohl keine Äste oder andere Materialfehler um die Nagelposition
ersichtlich waren.
Zweimal wurde der Gruppeneffekt der Verbindungsmittel geprüft: mit geschossenen Nagelschrauben
und mit eingedrückten Nagelschrauben (Pusher 275 kg). In einer Gruppe wurden fünf
Verbindungsmittel einreihig angewendet mit einem Abstand zwischen jedem Verbindungsmittel von
50 mm. Der Durchschnittwert pro Verbindungsmittel ist auch in Abbildung 4 mittels orangenen
Sternen abgebildet. Der Durchschnittswert der fünf Verbindungsmittel liegt innerhalb der Werte der
Einzelverbindungsmittel. Da nur zwei Prüfungen durchgeführt wurden, kann noch keine definitive
Aussage gegeben werden, ob eine Reduktion der Presskraft erfolgt wenn mehrere Verbindungsmittel
angewendet werden.
Abbildung 4: Erreichte Presskräfte der Verbindungsmittel abhängig von die Vorpresskraft
Weiterhin wurde das Langzeitverhalten der Verbindungsmittel und ihrer Einbringmethoden geprüft,
siehe Abbildung 5. Mit dieser Prüfung kann eingeschätzt werden, ob die Presskraft 10 s nach dem
Verbinden auch repräsentativ ist für die ganze Aushärtezeit des Klebstoffes. Generell wird eine
Aushärtezeit von drei Stunden als realistisch gesehen, wobei auch Klebstoffe mit kürzeren
Aushärtezeiten verfügbar sind. Auf der waagerechten Achse von Abbildung 5 ist die Zeit (nicht linear)
in Sekunden (s) und Minuten (m) angetragen. Da es nicht möglich war drei Stunden zu messen,
wurden die Messungen während verschiedener Pausen durchgeführt, wodurch sich die
unterschiedlichen Messzeiten ergaben. Die Abbildung zeigt, dass über die Zeit eine kleine Erhöhung
der Presskraft erwartet werden kann (vermutlich durch die Abkühlung der Verbindungsmittel), bevor
die Kraft wieder abnimmt (zeitabhängiges Kriechen). Es ist unwahrscheinlich, dass die Kraft nach drei
Stunden viel geringer ist als die, die nach 10 Sekunden ermittelt wurde.
Abbildung 5: Langzeitverhalten der Presskraft von Nagelschrauben bei verschiedenen Verbindungsmethoden
E.6 Presskräfte der Tellerkopfschrauben

Als Zusatz wurden Presskräfte von Tellerkopfschrauben von 6 mm und 8 mm geprüft. Die
Presskraftverläufe sind in Abbildung 6 dargestellt. Sichtbar sind die Presskräfte beim Erreichen des
bündigen Eindrehens, beim Versenken des Kopfes bis einige Millimeter, und beim weiteren Eindrehen
bis zum Durchdrehen des Gewindes (8 mm Schraube mit kurzem Gewinde) oder Kopfdurchziehen. Die
erreichbaren Presskräfte beim bündigen Eindrehen sind geringer als die beim Versenken des Kopfes.
Abbildung 6: Presskräfte der 6 mm und 8 mm Tellerkopfschraube während dem Erreichen des bündigen Eindrehens,
weiter Versenken und dem weiter Drehen zur Prüfung der Kopfdurchziehfestigkeit.
E.7 Diskussion der erhaltene Presskräfte Nagelschrauben und Klammern

Die meisten Klebstoffe erfordern einen Pressdruck von mehr als 0.6 N/mm2 um eine gute Verbindung
zu gewährleisten. 1 Komponent-Polyurethan (1K-PUR) Klebstoffe, die nur 0.1 N/mm2 benötigen, sind
aber auch verfügbar und werden viel im Holzbau verwendet. Tabelle 2 schlägt maximale
Verbindungsmittelabstände für verschiedene Stegbreiten vor. In der Tabelle wird angenommen, dass
nur eine Reihe von Verbindungsmitteln angewendet wird und dass die totale Presskraft nicht
abgemindert werden muss für mehrere Verbindungsmittel (kein Gruppeneffekt).
Tabelle 2: Fazit von Presskraft in Zusammenhang mit maximalem Verbindungsmittelabstand (einreihig) auf verschiedene
Stegbreiten um einen Pressdruck von 0.1 N/mm2 zu erreichen
Verbindungs– Verbindungsmittelabstand [mm] einreihig

Methode Presskraft [N]
mittel
Durchschnitt
(n = 8) Stegbreite 60 mm Stegbreite 80 mm Stegbreite 100 mm
Nagelschraube Geschossen 155.8 26.0 19.5 15.6
Nagelschraube Pusher 157 kg 260.2 43.4 32.5 26.0
Nagelschraube Pusher 275 kg 316.3 52.7 39.5 31.6
Klammer Geschossen 98.0 16.3 12.2 9.8
Die Tabelle zeigt, dass in manchen Fällen die Verbindungsmittel sehr dicht eingebracht werden
müssten, um eine ausreichende Presskraft zu erreichen. Für eine zweireihige Anordnung können die
Abstände allerdings verdoppelt werden. Gleichzeitig wird eine gleichmässigere Verteilung des
Pressdruckes über die Fuge erwartet (weitere Untersuchung notwendig).
Die benutzten Klammern konnten nur geringe Presskräfte erzeugen. Die Klammern wurden nach den
Prüfungen mit der Platte aus dem Steg gezogen und fotografiert. Klammerspitzen von zwei Klammen
sind zusammen mit der gemessenen Presskraft in Abbildung 7 abgebildet. Tendenziell konnte
festgestellt werden, dass die erreichte Presskraft geringer war, wenn die Klammer sich nicht spreizte
(Abbildung 7 links) im Vergleich zu parallelen Klammerstiften (Abbildung 7 rechts). Der Einsatz von
speziellen Spreizklammern könnte somit eine Traglasterhöhung bewirken (weitere Untersuchungen
sind hierzu notwendig).
Abbildung 7: Abstand der Klammerspitzen im Vergleich zur erhaltenen Presskraft
E.8 Überlegungen zum Klebstoff

Das Verhalten des Klebstoffes selbst während des Einbringprozesses des Verbindungsmittels ist noch
Gegenstand weiterführender Untersuchungen. Allgemein wird angenommen, wenn der Klebstoff
flüssig ist eine Kraftspitze dazu führen kann, dass der Klebstoff aus der Fuge gepresst wird. In der
Verwendung viskoser Klebstoffe ist das Risiko wahrscheinlich geringer, allerdings könnte dieser sich
auch weniger in der Klebefuge verteilen (in Abhängigkeit der Applikationsart). Da die meisten
Klebstoffe unter hohen Pressdrücken (> 0.6 N/mm2) verwendet werden dürfen, ist dieses Ausdrücken
unter normale Produktionsbedingungen nicht zu erwarten. Weiterhin ist das Einhalten der geforderten
Fugendicke sehr wichtig. Erfolgt das Aufbringen des Klebstoffes zwar nicht gleichmässig verteilt aber
in dünnen Raupen, kann der Pusher eine weitere gleichmässige Verteilung des Klebstoffs in der Fuge
fördern. Für eingeschossene Verbindungsmitteln kann dies nur über das Eigengewicht der Platte
erfolgen. Daher sind abschliessende Scherfestigkeitsprüfungen unter Verwendung des Pushers
notwendig.
E.9 Fazit und Empfehlungen

Die Prüfungen mit der Abbundanlage haben gezeigt, dass es mit Nagelschrauben und Pusher möglich
ist, einen gewissen Mindestdruck unter Verwendung von 1 Komponent-PUR Klebstoffe mit geforderten
Pressdrücken von 0.1 N/mm2 zu erreichen. Hierfür sind eher geringe Verbindungsmittelabstände und
eine zweireihige Anordnung notwendig. Ob mit flüssigen oder viskosen Klebstoffen genügend gute
Festigkeiten erreicht werden können, ist separat zu prüfen (Scherprüfungen).
Im Moment werden die Nagelschrauben unter Verwendung des Puschers kraftgesteuert eingebracht
(Druck reguliert). Dabei ergeben sich in Abhängigkeit des Materialwiderstandes (lokale
Rohdichteunterschiede) unterschiedliche Eindringtiefen. Es wäre interessant, ob durch einen
weggesteuerten Einbringprozess mehr Presskraft und zugleich eine geringere Streuung in den
Eindringtiefen erreicht werden kann. Die gesicherte Anwendung von Klammern für die Pressver-
klebung würde einen grösseren Forschungs- und Entwicklungsweg benötigen. Der Vorteil liegt
allerdings in der hohen Einbringfrequenz (ca. 5 Hz), wie auch bei geschossenen Nagelschrauben,
wodurch mehr Verbindungsmittel in der gleichen Zeit oder sogar in kürzerer Zeit eingebracht werden
können und somit ökonomisch attraktiv für die Wirtschaft sind.
Für die Prüfung in der Abbundanlage standen keine langen Rillennägel (75 mm) zur Verfügung.
Prüfungen mit Handgeräten im Labor der Berner Fachhochschule zeigten aber mehr Presskraft als mit
geschossenen Nagelschrauben. Die Verwendung von verschiedenen Rillennägeln (dicker und länger)
könnte noch weiterführend untersucht werden sowie auch die mögliche Verwendung mit einem
Puscher.
E.10 Danksagung
Die Berner Fachhochschule dankt den Mitarbeitern der Brawand Zimmerei, im speziellen Markus Roth
und Rolf Feuz, und Georg Disler von ITW haubold Paslode GmbH für ihren Einsatz und die
Unterstützung.
Appendix F Quality of press glued bonds
F.1 Series Ideal Conditions 1 (IC1)

Shear test of glue line according to SN EN 14080:2013 (SN EN 392:1995 / SN EN 386:2001)
Test specimen: Series IC1
Wood species Spruce
Adhesive 1C-PUR
Length Mean Minimum
(in grain ShearFailure Shear Substrate Substrate Substrate Substrate
Width direction) area load strength failure 1 failure 2 failure failure
Nr. [mm] [mm] A [mm2]
Fu [N] fv [N/mm2] [%] [%] [%] [%] Result
1 1 40.0 50.0 2000 20862 9.97 80% 90% 85% 20.7% yes
2 2 40.0 50.0 2000 23059 11.02 95% 95% 95% 20.0% yes
3 3 40.0 50.0 2000 19970 9.55 91% 90% 95% 26.3% yes
4 4 40.0 50.0 2000 23466 11.22 75% 80% 80% 20.0% yes
5 5 40.0 50.0 2000 21014 10.05 90% 85% 90% 20.0% yes
6 6 40.0 50.0 2000 22347 10.68 75% 84% 80% 20.0% yes
7 7 40.0 50.0 2000 22828 10.91 88% 95% 95% 20.0% yes
8 8 40.0 50.0 2000 18732 8.95 98% 100% 100% 34.2% yes
9 9 40.0 50.0 2000 17591 8.41 25% 15% 20% 41.5% no
10 10 40.0 50.0 2000 16334 7.81 15% 15% 15% 49.5% no
11 11 40.0 50.0 2000 14155 6.77 0% 0% 0% 63.3% no
12 12 40.0 50.0 2000 21635 10.34 50% 60% 55% 20.0% yes
Mean 9.64 Number of failed 3
Standard derivation 1.12
COV 14%
Shear test of glue

line according to SN EN 14080:2013 (SN EN 392:1995 / SN EN 386:2001)
Wood species Spruce
Adhesive 1C-PUR
Length Mean Minimum
(in grain Shear Failure Shear Substrate Substrate Substrate Substrate
Nr. [mm] [mm] A [mm2] Fu [N] fv [N/mm2] [%] [%] [%] [%] Result
1 1 40.0 50.0 2000 18291 8.74 92% 95% 95% 37.0% yes
2 2 40.0 50.0 2000 22547 10.78 92% 95% 95% 20.0% yes
3 3 40.0 50.0 2000 20062 9.59 100% 100% 100% 25.8% yes
4 4 40.0 50.0 2000 21259 10.16 87% 90% 90% 20.0% yes
5 5 40.0 50.0 2000 18733 8.95 90% 95% 95% 34.2% yes
6 6 40.0 50.0 2000 20934 10.01 80% 85% 85% 20.0% yes
7 7 40.0 50.0 2000 17053 8.15 92% 93% 95% 44.9% yes
8 8 40.0 50.0 2000 20652 9.87 80% 88% 85% 22.0% yes
9 9 40.0 50.0 2000 18475 8.83 85% 93% 90% 35.8% yes
10 10 40.0 50.0 2000 23552 11.26 85% 90% 90% 20.0% yes
11 11 40.0 50.0 2000 17217 8.23 79% 82% 85% 43.8% yes
12 12 40.0 50.0 2000 19234 9.19 89% 90% 90% 31.0% yes
COV 14%
Shear test of glueline according to SN EN 14080:2013 (SN EN 392:1995 / SN EN 386:2001)

Wood species Spruce
Adhesive 1C-PUR
Length Mean Minimum
Nr. [mm] [mm] A [mm2] Fu [N] fv [N/mm ] [%]
2
[%] [%] [%] Result
1 1 40.0 50.0 2000 18139 8.67 60% 60% 60% 38.0% yes
2 2 40.0 50.0 2000 18529 8.86 88% 92% 90% 35.5% yes
3 3 40.0 50.0 2000 20801 9.94 90% 90% 90% 21.1% yes
4 4 40.0 50.0 2000 18175 8.69 100% 100% 100% 37.8% yes
5 5 40.0 50.0 2000 19440 9.29 98% 95% 100% 29.7% yes
6 6 40.0 50.0 2000 18727 8.95 100% 100% 100% 34.2% yes
7 7 40.0 50.0 2000 19151 9.15 100% 100% 100% 31.5% yes
8 8 40.0 50.0 2000 20275 9.69 90% 93% 95% 24.4% yes
9 9 40.0 50.0 2000 19599 9.37 100% 100% 100% 28.7% yes
10 10 40.0 50.0 2000 19394 9.27 95% 95% 95% 30.0% yes
11 11 40.0 50.0 2000 18875 9.02 100% 100% 100% 33.3% yes
12 12 40.0 50.0 2000 19328 9.24 80% 85% 85% 30.4% yes
COV 4%
F.4 Serie production conditions 1 (PC1)

Test specimen: Series PC1
Wood species Spruce
Adhesive 1C-PUR
Length Mean Minimum
Fu [N] fv [N/mm2] [%] [%] [%] [%] Result
1 1 40.0 50.0 2000 3838 1.83 2% 5% 5% 100.0% no
2 2 40.0 50.0 2000 3885 1.86 14% 15% 15% 100.0% no
3 3 40.0 50.0 2000 6325 3.02 0% 0% 0% 100.0% no
4 4 40.0 50.0 2000 8396 4.01 8% 7% 10% 100.0% no
5 5 40.0 50.0 2000 5111 2.44 0% 0% 0% 100.0% no
6 6 40.0 50.0 2000 12458 5.96 20% 15% 20% 100.0% no
7 7 40.0 50.0 2000 5915 2.83 0% 0% 0% 100.0% no
8 8 40.0 50.0 2000 12037 5.75 20% 30% 25% 100.0% no
9 9 40.0 50.0 2000 4544 2.17 7% 5% 10% 100.0% no
10 10 40.0 50.0 2000 6402 3.06 10% 10% 10% 100.0% no
11 11 40.0 50.0 2000 7216 3.45 1% 2% 5% 100.0% no
12 12 40.0 50.0 2000 11756 5.62 75% 80% 80% 100.0% no
COV 41%
F.5 Series production conditions 2 (PC2)

Wood species Spruce
Adhesive 1C-PUR
Length Mean Minimum
Nr. [mm] [mm] A [mm2]Fu [N] fv [N/mm2] [%] [%] [%] [%] Result
1 1 40.0 50.0 2000 16717 7.99 70% 65% 70% 47.0% yes
2 2 40.0 50.0 2000 15602 7.46 95% 92% 95% 54.1% yes
3 3 40.0 50.0 2000 16939 8.10 70% 65% 70% 45.6% yes
4 4 40.0 50.0 2000 16368 7.82 73% 70% 75% 49.2% yes
5 5 40.0 50.0 2000 17023 8.14 95% 92% 95% 45.1% yes
6 6 40.0 50.0 2000 16728 8.00 80% 80% 80% 47.0% yes
7 7 40.0 50.0 2000 18079 8.64 90% 90% 90% 38.4% yes
8 8 40.0 50.0 2000 16705 7.99 97% 98% 100% 47.1% yes
9 9 40.0 50.0 2000 17846 8.53 60% 65% 65% 39.8% yes
10 10 40.0 50.0 2000 18147 8.67 95% 95% 95% 37.9% yes
11 11 40.0 50.0 2000 17976 8.59 85% 80% 85% 39.0% yes
12 12 40.0 50.0 2000 17652 8.44 95% 95% 95% 41.1% yes
COV 4%
F.6 Series production conditions 3 (PC3)

Wood species Spruce
Adhesive 1C-PUR
Length Mean Minimum
Fu [N] fv [N/mm2] [%] [%] [%] [%] Result
1 1 40.0 50.0 2000 17449 8.34 80% 78% 80% 42.4% yes
2 2 40.0 50.0 2000 15477 7.40 95% 90% 95% 54.9% yes
3 3 40.0 50.0 2000 17927 8.57 93% 93% 95% 39.3% yes
4 4 40.0 50.0 2000 14585 6.97 90% 87% 90% 60.6% yes
5 5 40.0 50.0 2000 14904 7.12 90% 82% 90% 58.5% yes
6 6 40.0 50.0 2000 14820 7.08 97% 98% 100% 59.1% yes
7 7 40.0 50.0 2000 16888 8.07 90% 87% 90% 45.9% yes
8 8 40.0 50.0 2000 18057 8.63 97% 93% 95% 38.5% yes
9 9 40.0 50.0 2000 18256 8.73 97% 97% 100% 37.2% yes
10 10 40.0 50.0 2000 17290 8.26 85% 82% 85% 43.4% yes
11 11 40.0 50.0 2000 18087 8.65 95% 92% 95% 38.3% yes
12 12 40.0 50.0 2000 16057 7.68 90% 87% 90% 51.2% yes
COV 8%
F.7 Series other conditions 1 (OC1)
Shear test of glueline according to SN EN 14080:2013 (SN EN 392:1995 / SN EN 386:2001)

Test specimen: Series OC1
Wood species Spruce
Adhesive 1C-PUR
Length Mean Minimum
1 1 40.0 50.0 2000 18487 8.84 100% 100% 100% 35.8% yes
2 2 40.0 50.0 2000 19980 9.55 100% 100% 100% 26.3% yes
3 3 40.0 50.0 2000 17186 8.22 93% 95% 95% 44.0% yes
4 4 40.0 50.0 2000 17579 8.40 98% 97% 100% 41.5% yes
5 5 40.0 50.0 2000 17196 8.22 95% 95% 95% 44.0% yes
6 6 40.0 50.0 2000 18026 8.62 99% 100% 100% 38.7% yes
7 7 40.0 50.0 2000 19318 9.23 100% 100% 100% 30.5% yes
8 8 40.0 50.0 2000 20632 9.86 90% 92% 95% 22.1% yes
9 9 40.0 50.0 2000 18274 8.74 100% 100% 100% 37.1% yes
10 10 40.0 50.0 2000 19551 9.35 63% 70% 70% 29.0% yes
11 11 40.0 50.0 2000 20344 9.72 100% 100% 100% 24.0% yes
12 12 40.0 50.0 2000 16157 7.72 98% 100% 100% 50.6% yes
COV 7%

Wood species Spruce
Adhesive 1C-PUR
Length Mean Minimum
1 1 40.0 50.0 2000 15366 7.34 0% 0% 0% 55.6% no
2 2 40.0 50.0 2000 15523 7.42 1% 0% 5% 54.6% no
3 3 40.0 50.0 2000 24322 11.63 78% 75% 80% 20.0% yes
4 4 40.0 50.0 2000 21946 10.49 100% 100% 100% 20.0% yes
5 5 40.0 50.0 2000 24371 11.65 90% 92% 95% 20.0% yes
6 6 40.0 50.0 2000 21325 10.19 84% 77% 85% 20.0% yes
7 7 40.0 50.0 2000 24809 11.86 52% 48% 50% 20.0% yes
8 8 40.0 50.0 2000 20056 9.59 50% 50% 50% 25.8% yes
9 9 40.0 50.0 2000 18126 8.66 5% 3% 5% 38.1% no
10 10 40.0 50.0 2000 18248 8.72 7% 5% 10% 37.3% no
11 11 40.0 50.0 2000 23510 11.24 92% 95% 95% 20.0% yes
12 12 40.0 50.0 2000 23622 11.29 69% 60% 65% 20.0% yes
13 13 40.0 50.0 2000 22556 10.78 96% 92% 95% 20.0% yes
14 14 40.0 50.0 2000 22456 10.73 75% 70% 75% 20.0% yes
COV 15%

Wood species Spruce
Adhesive 1C-PUR
Length Mean Minimum
Fu [N] fv [N/mm2] [%] [%] [%] [%] Result
1 1 40.0 50.0 2000 12495 5.97 45% 47% 50% 100.0% no
2 2 40.0 50.0 2000 15094 7.21 98% 97% 100% 57.3% yes
3 3 40.0 50.0 2000 11152 5.33 5% 5% 5% 100.0% no
4 4 40.0 50.0 2000 18672 8.93 98% 97% 100% 34.6% yes
5 5 40.0 50.0 2000 12306 5.88 37% 30% 35% 100.0% no
6 6 40.0 50.0 2000 16693 7.98 99% 97% 100% 47.2% yes
7 7 40.0 50.0 2000 13763 6.58 50% 50% 50% 65.8% no
8 8 40.0 50.0 2000 16200 7.74 97% 97% 100% 50.3% yes
9 9 40.0 50.0 2000 15915 7.61 55% 55% 55% 52.1% yes
10 10 40.0 50.0 2000 16770 8.02 100% 100% 100% 46.7% yes
11 11 40.0 50.0 2000 16132 7.71 47% 50% 50% 50.7% no
12 12 40.0 50.0 2000 16434 7.86 95% 95% 95% 48.8% yes
13 13 40.0 50.0 2000 16809 8.03 70% 72% 75% 46.4% yes
14 14 40.0 50.0 2000 16142 7.72 100% 100% 100% 50.7% yes
COV 13%

Wood species Spruce
Adhesive 1C-PUR
Length Mean Minimum
Fu [N] fv [N/mm2] [%] [%] [%] [%] Result
1 1 40.0 50.0 2000 27077 12.94 32% 35% 35% 20.0% yes
2 2 40.0 50.0 2000 25440 12.16 100% 100% 100% 20.0% yes
3 3 40.0 50.0 2000 23709 11.33 100% 100% 100% 20.0% yes
4 4 40.0 50.0 2000 24144 11.54 60% 65% 65% 20.0% yes
5 5 40.0 50.0 2000 22685 10.84 50% 40% 45% 20.0% yes
6 6 40.0 50.0 2000 24584 11.75 92% 93% 95% 20.0% yes
7 7 40.0 50.0 2000 26639 12.73 4% 3% 5% 20.0% no
8 8 40.0 50.0 2000 24009 11.48 53% 55% 55% 20.0% yes
9 9 40.0 50.0 2000 27670 13.23 25% 20% 25% 20.0% yes
10 10 40.0 50.0 2000 24123 11.53 100% 100% 100% 20.0% yes
11 11 40.0 50.0 2000 28407 13.58 45% 40% 45% 20.0% yes
12 12 40.0 50.0 2000 23691 11.32 100% 100% 100% 20.0% yes
COV 7%
F.11 Series other conditions 5 (PC5)

Wood species Spruce
Adhesive 1C-PUR
Length Mean Minimum
1 1 40.0 50.0 2000 26285 12.56 87% 90% 90% 20.0% yes
2 2 40.0 50.0 2000 25801 12.33 90% 90% 90% 20.0% yes
3 3 40.0 50.0 2000 29491 14.10 81% 85% 85% 20.0% yes
4 4 40.0 50.0 2000 27123 12.96 76% 75% 80% 20.0% yes
5 5 40.0 50.0 2000 29202 13.96 75% 75% 75% 20.0% yes
6 6 40.0 50.0 2000 27860 13.32 85% 87% 90% 20.0% yes
7 7 40.0 50.0 2000 29563 14.13 75% 80% 80% 20.0% yes
8 8 40.0 50.0 2000 26615 12.72 90% 90% 90% 20.0% yes
9 9 40.0 50.0 2000 25575 12.22 25% 25% 25% 20.0% yes
10 10 40.0 50.0 2000 25517 12.20 77% 80% 80% 20.0% yes
11 11 40.0 50.0 2000 25861 12.36 60% 65% 65% 20.0% yes
12 12 40.0 50.0 2000 29173 13.94 68% 60% 65% 20.0% yes
COV 6%
Postfach 6096
CH-2500 Biel 6
Telephone +41 32 344 03 41
fe.ahb@bfh.ch
ahb.bfh.ch
Funding
State Secretariat for Education, Research and Innovation SERI
Einsteinstrasse 2
CH-3003 Bern

2018 Researchreport - Press Gluing - Final Report Complete 600dpi

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

2018 Researchreport - Press Gluing - Final Report Complete 600dpi

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Investigation and analysis of press

glued connections for timber structures

‣‣Institute for Timber Construction, Structures and Architecture

Report Nr. K.007404.77FE-V1

Contract Nr. SBFI No. C15.0052

Date 3rd July 2018

Client State Secretariat for Education Research and Innovation SERI

Address of the Bern University of Applied Sciences

Authors Marcus Schiere, Steffen Franke, Bettina Franke

Project Leader Prof. Dr. Steffen Franke

Head of the Institute Prof. Andreas Müller

Bern University of Applied Sciences

© by Bern University of Applied Sciences

COST - Scientific report

COST Action number FP1402

SERI project number C15.0052

Project duration from 01.12.2015 to 26.06.2018

Reporting period from 01.12.2015 to 26.06.2018

Academic title Prof. Dr.

Business address Bern University of Applied Sciences

State Secretariat for Education, Research and Innovation SERI

2 Work Package 1 - Material and boundary conditions ....................................................................... 3

4 Work Package 3 - Numerical simulations of the press glued connection ........................................ 19

6 Work Package 5 - Drafting of design rules and guidelines............................................................. 31

7 Work Package 6 - Transfer of knowledge, summary and report ..................................................... 33

8 Conclusions and outlook .............................................................................................................. 34

10 Regulations of the present report ................................................................................................. 34

Appendix A Head pull through strengths of screws and nails.......................................................... 39

Appendix B Milestone measurement of fastener loads .................................................................... 43

Appendix C Calculation of statistical parameters ............................................................................ 47

Appendix D Measured compression by different fasteners .............................................................. 49

Appendix E Experiments Brawand .................................................................................................. 71

Appendix F Quality of press glued bonds ....................................................................................... 79

α Angle between wood grain and connector axis [°]

1.2 Objectives and deliverables

1.3 General work package outline and organization

1.4 Report setup

2 Work Package 1 - Material and boundary conditions

2.2 Applications, production, and alternatives

2.3 Rules, regulations and product data sheets

Table 1: Most frequent characteristics of the timber structures assessed

2.3.3 Timber and material

3 Work Package 2 - Determination of the achievable pressure using

3.2 Measurement of compression loads of single fasteners (Milestone 1)

3.3 Investigation of compression capacity of single fasteners

3.4 Used equipment

3.5 Compression loads of single fasteners

3.5.2 Screw type fasteners

DT / Würth SD8 SD 6 8.2 120 50/15 2223 2744 13 1772 1035

Figure 10: Statistical visualisation of the compression loads

Figure 11: Statistical visualisation of the compression loads

3.6 Effect of fastener head depth on achieved compressive load

3.7 Investigation of compression capacity of multiple fasteners

3.8 Comparison of achieved compression loads with those found in literature

Washer head 6 22 280 3730 2903 [12], ρ = 470 kg/m3

Washer head 6 35 280 8480 7215 [12]

4 Work Package 3 - Numerical simulations of the press glued connection

4.2 Pressure distributions found in literature

4.3 Numerical studies and models

Figure 16: FUJI-film Prescale pressure foil measuring ranges.

1 Time dependent behaviour

4.4 Parameter study

5 Work Package 4 - Investigation of the mechanical behavior of

5.2 Shear load capacity of the bond found in literature