sustainability

Article
Analysis of Longitudinal Timber Beam Joints Loaded
with Simple Bending
Kristyna Vavrusova 1, * , Antonin Lokaj 1 , David Mikolasek 1 and Oldrich Sucharda 2
1 Department of Structures, Faculty of Civil Engineering, VSB—Technical University of Ostrava,
708 00 Ostrava-Poruba, Czech Republic; antonin.lokaj@vsb.cz (A.L.); david.mikolasek@vsb.cz (D.M.)
2 Department of Building Materials and Diagnostics, Faculty of Civil Engineering, VSB—Technical University
of Ostrava, 708 00 Ostrava-Poruba, Czech Republic; oldrich.sucharda@vsb.cz
* Correspondence: kristyna.vavrusova@vsb.cz; Tel.: +420-599-321-375




Received: 6 October 2020; Accepted: 4 November 2020; Published: 9 November 2020


Abstract: The joints in timber structures are often the decisive factor in determining the load-bearing
capacity, rigidity, sustainability, and durability of timber structures. Compared with the fasteners used
for steel and concrete structures, fasteners for timber structures generally have a lower load-bearing
capacity and rigidity, with the exception of glued joints. Glued joints in timber structures constitute a
diverse group of rigid joints which are distinguished by sudden failure when the joint’s load-bearing
capacity is reached. In this contribution, the load-bearing capacity of a longitudinal joint for a beam
under simple flexural stress is analyzed using glued, double-sided splices. Joints with double-sided
splices and connecting screws were also tested to compare the load-bearing capacity and rigidity.
A third series of tests was carried out on joints made using glued double-sided splices augmented
with screws. The aim of this combined joint was to ensure greater ductility after the load-bearing
capacity of the glued splice joint had been reached.

Keywords: timber; joint; screw; glued; adhesive; bending strength; sustainability

1. Introduction
Timber use in the building industry has grown because of its sustainability, great material
properties, and renewability. This has brought new trends, not only in the field of innovative
wood-based materials but also the joining of the timber structure elements. The joints in timber
structures are often the decisive factor in determining the load-bearing capacity, rigidity, and durability
of timber structures.
Besides commonly used connections in the building industry for joining timber elements,
the second largest group consists of connections used for the reconstruction of timber structure
elements—for its strengthening or for the replacement of damaged sections of wood. Replacement of
damaged sections is typical for beams loaded mostly with bending. For these joints it is possible to use
either glued joints or joints with steel fasteners.
Glued-in steel rods or plates are also commonly used in glued joints. Some specialists from all
around the world [1–3], including the Czech Republic [4–6], are dedicated to improving the capacity
and performance of joints in timber structures using glued-in steel rods and plates [7].
A second option is joints with glued outer splices (wood, wood-based, and steel). The load-bearing
capacity and deformation of these joints are influenced by considerably more factors than in the case
of glued-in steel rod or plate joints [8]. Factors mainly include the type of wood species, adhesive
properties, glued line thickness, moisture, and geometry. Worldwide, research inquiries and the testing
of these joints, focusing on various influences and their combinations affecting their bearing capacity,
are already in progress. For example, authors in [9] focus on the mechanical behavior of these joints.

Sustainability 2020, 12, 9288; doi:10.3390/su12219288 www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

 Sustainability 2020, 12, 9288 2 of 15
Sustainability 2020, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 2 of 15

behavior of these joints. Other works are mainly devoted to the carrying capacity of adhesives in
Other works are mainly devoted to the carrying capacity of adhesives in combination with various
combination with various aspects [10–12] and the thickness of the glued lines [13].
aspects [10–12] and the thickness of the glued lines [13].
When the maximum load-carrying capacity of these joints is reached, there is a sudden failure
When the maximum load-carrying capacity of these joints is reached, there is a sudden failure of
of the joint by brittle fracture. Sudden failure without large deformation is very dangerous and affects
the joint by brittle fracture. Sudden failure without large deformation is very dangerous and affects
the reliability of structures. Therefore, we decided to add another fastener with plastic deformation
the reliability of structures. Therefore, we decided to add another fastener with plastic deformation
properties to a brittle bonded joint in order to ensure greater ductility and thereby increase its safety,
properties to a brittle bonded joint in order to ensure greater ductility and thereby increase its safety,
even at the cost of large deformations. The occurrence of these deformations highlights the
even at the cost of large deformations. The occurrence of these deformations highlights the overloading
overloading of the joint and allows for corrective action. This is the reason we tested both glued and
of the joint and allows for corrective action. This is the reason we tested both glued and screw joints
screw joints themselves as well as their combination.
themselves as well as their combination.

2.2.Materials
Materialsand
andMethods
Methods

2.1.
2.1.Laboratory
LaboratoryTesting
Testing
To
To analyze
analyze the
the load-bearing
load-bearing capacity
capacityofofaa longitudinal
longitudinaljoint
jointsubjected
subjectedto tosimple
simpleflexural
flexuralstress,
stress,
destructive
destructive laboratory
laboratorytesting
testingwaswas performed
performedon onsample
samplejoints
jointsdesigned
designedwithwiththree
three basic
basic types
types of
of
splices
splicesin
inaa central
central beam:
beam: by bygluing,
gluing,by
bygluing
gluinginin combination
combinationwithwith mechanical
mechanicalfasteners,
fasteners,and
and using
using
only
onlymechanical
mechanicalfasteners.
fasteners. Two
Twomaterial
materialvariants
variants ofofsplices
spliceswere
wereselected:
selected:from
frommature
matureandandlaminated
laminated
veneer
veneerlumber.
lumber. InIntotal,
total,six
sixtest
testsets
setswere
werecreated
createdforfor two
two material
material variants
variants of
of splices
splices in
in combination
combination
with
with three
three methods
methods of of their
their fastening.
fastening. Each
Eachtest
testset
setconsisted
consistedofoffive
fivesamples.
samples. For
Forthe
thetesting,
testing,samples
samples
were assembled consisting
were assembled consisting of a central beam with dimensions 110 180 × 1220 mm and madeof
dimensions 110 × 180 × 1220 mm and made ofsolid
solid
timber
timber with
with the
the use of laminate
laminate veneer
veneer lumber
lumbersplices
splicesandandsplices
splicesmade
madeofofsolid
solidtimber
timber(see
(see Figure
Figure 1).
1).

Figure 1. Laboratory testing scheme.

Figure 1. Laboratory testing scheme.

The
Thecentral
centralbeam
beamand andsolid
solidtimber
timbersplices
spliceswere
weremade madeof of solid
solid spruce
spruce(Picea
(Piceaabies),
abies),which
whichhas hasaa
strength
strength class
class of
of C24
C24 and
and average
average density
density of
of 370
370 kg
kg m m−3. .Laminated
−3
Laminatedveneer
veneerlumber
lumber(LVL)
(LVL)splices
spliceswere
were
made of the R type softwood veneers (spruce/pine) with average density
made of the R type softwood veneers (spruce/pine) with average density of 510 kg m . of 510 kg m −3
−3.
Two-component
Two-componentepoxy epoxyadhesive
adhesivewaswasused
usedforforstructural
structuralgluing,
gluing,which
whichwas wasapplied
appliedin inaa22mmmm
thick layer on the entire contact surface between the splice and central
thick layer on the entire contact surface between the splice and central element. element.
The test samples
The test sampleswere were conditioned
conditioned priorprior to destructive
to destructive testing attesting at aambient
a standard standard ambient
temperature
temperature ◦
of 20 ± 2 C and of 20 ± 2 °Chumidity
relative and relative humidity
of 65 ± of 65 ± 5%.
5%. To determine theTo determine
moisture in thethe
testmoisture
samples,in the test
a moisture
samples, a moisture detector was used. The average moisture
detector was used. The average moisture content of tested elements was 10.2%.content of tested elements was 10.2%.
Countersunk
Countersunk self-tapping screws were used as the mechanical fasteners: Ø8/80 for joints with
self-tapping screws were used as the mechanical fasteners: Ø8/80 for joints with
splices
spliceswith
withlaminated
laminatedveneerveneerlumber
lumberandandØ8/100
Ø8/100 forforjoints
jointswith
withsplices
splicesmade
madeof ofsolid
solidtimber.
timber. Screws
Screws
were
were made
made ofofcarbon
carbonsteel
steelwith
with white
white galvanic
galvanic zinczinc coating
coating andandhad had
a yielda yield strength
strength fyk = N1000
fyk = 1000 mmN−2 .
mm −2. For the joining of each splice, eight screws were used (see Figure 2).
For the joining of each splice, eight screws were used (see Figure 2).
 Sustainability 2020, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 of 15
Sustainability2020,
Sustainability 12,x9288
2020,12, FOR PEER REVIEW 33of
of15
15

(a) (b)
(a) (b)
Figure 2. Layout char of screws. (a) Laminated veneer lumber (LVL) splice; (b) Solid timber splice.
Figure
Figure2.2.Layout
Layoutchar
charof
ofscrews.
screws.(a)
(a)Laminated
Laminatedveneer
veneerlumber
lumber(LVL)
(LVL)splice;
splice;(b)
(b)Solid
Solidtimber
timbersplice.
splice.
Testing proceeded on a hydraulic pressure machine at the laboratories of the Faculty of Civil
Testing proceeded
Testing proceeded on on aa hydraulic
hydraulic pressure
pressure machine
machine atat the
the laboratories
laboratories of of the
the Faculty
Faculty of
of Civil
Civil
Engineering, VSB-TU Ostrava, and force was increased gradually. The sample was loaded with
Engineering, VSB-TU
Engineering, VSB-TU Ostrava,
Ostrava,and andforce
forcewas increased
was gradually.
increased The sample
gradually. The samplewas loaded with vertical
was loaded with
vertical force applied in thirds of the span. An optimal force rate was chosen for the press. Failure
force applied
vertical in thirdsinofthirds
force applied the span.
of theAn optimal
span. force rate
An optimal wasrate
force chosen for the press.
was chosen for theFailure among
press. Failure
among all tested samples appeared in a time boundary of 300 ± 120 s which corresponds to the
all tested
among all samples appeared
tested samples in a time
appeared in boundary of 300 ±of120
a time boundary 300s ±which
120 scorresponds to the interval
which corresponds to the
interval of laboratory tests for short-time strength according to the current European standards for
of laboratory
interval tests fortests
of laboratory short-time strengthstrength
for short-time according to the current
according European
to the current standards
European for timber
standards for
timber structure capacity [14,15].
structure capacity [14,15].
timber structure capacity [14,15].
During testing, the force (maximum joint force) was recorded for each test sample (accuracy of
Duringtesting,
During testing,the
theforce
force(maximum
(maximumjoint jointforce)
force)was
wasrecorded
recorded for for each
each test
test sample
sample (accuracy
(accuracyof of
0.01 kN), and the corresponding deformation of the joint was measured in the supports and in the
0.01 kN),
0.01 kN), and
and the
the corresponding
corresponding deformation
deformationof ofthe
thejoint
joint was
was measured
measuredin in the
the supports
supports and
and in
in the
the
middle of the span at half the height of the cross-section of the test sample (accuracy of 0.01 mm).
middleof
middle of the
the span
span at
at half
half the
the height
height of
of the
the cross-section
cross-section of
of the
the test
test sample
sample (accuracy of 0.01 mm).
2.2.Calculation
2.2. CalculationAccording
AccordingtotoStandards
Standards
2.2. Calculation According to Standards
2.2.1.Glued
2.2.1. GluedJoints
Joints
2.2.1. Glued Joints
Accordingto
According toprevious
previouslaboratory
laboratorytests
testsand
andnumerical
numericalcalculations,
calculations, this
this type
type of
ofjoint
jointhas
hastwo
two
According to previous laboratory tests and numerical calculations, this type of joint has two
basictypes
basic types of failure:
failure:failure
failurealong
alongthethe
glue lineline
glue (Rbc1(R
) or failure
) or of splice
failure of veneers
splice (LVL
veneers or solid
(LVL timber).
or solid
basic types of failure: failure along the glue line (Rbc1) orbc1 failure of splice veneers (LVL or solid timber).
Failure Failure
timber). along the
alongglue
the line is calculated
glue line with
is calculated withtwo twovariants:
variants:uniform
uniform (Rbc2)) and unequal
unequal(R(R bc3))
Failure along the glue line is calculated with two variants: uniform (Rbc2bc2 ) and unequal (Rbc3 bc3)
distributionofofshear
distribution shearstress.
stress.
distribution of shear stress.
Calculationofofthe
Calculation themaximum
maximumjointjointforce
forceRRbcisisbased
basedon onthe
themoment
momenttransferred
transferredby bythe
theglued
gluedjoint
joint
Calculation of the maximum joint force Rbcbcis based on the moment transferred by the glued joint
for both central elements as well as the designed load-carrying capacity of the
for both central elements as well as the designed load-carrying capacity of the joint (Figure 3).joint (Figure 3).
for both central elements as well as the designed load-carrying capacity of the joint (Figure 3).

Figure3.3.Maximum
Figure Maximumjoint
jointforce—glued
force—gluedjoint.
joint.
Figure 3. Maximum joint force—glued joint.
The
Themaximum
maximumjoint forceRRbcbcisisdetermined
jointforce determinedfrom fromthethefollowing
followingexpression:
expression:
The maximum joint force Rbc is determined from the following expression:
2𝑀
R𝑅 𝑅 2M
bc =
2𝑀b [kNkN ] (1)
r𝑟 𝑟 kN (1)(1)
where Mb is the moment transferred by the glued joint, and r is the lever arm of the test sample.
where Mbbisisthe
where M themoment
momenttransferred
transferred by by the
the glued
glued joint, and rr is
joint, and is the
the lever
lever arm
arm of
of the
the test
test sample.
sample.
The moment transferred by the glued joint is determined from the following expression:
Themoment
The moment transferred
transferred by
by the
the glued
glued joint
joint is
is determined
determined from from the following expression:
𝑀 𝐹 . 2. 𝑅 kNm (2)
𝑀M =𝐹 F. 2.×𝑅2 × kNm Rcc [kNm] (2)
(2)
b tc
Sustainability 2020, 12, 9288 4 of 15

Sustainability 2020, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 15

where Ftc is the designed load-carrying capacity of the joint determined from expression (3) for shear
strength
where Fof the
tc is thesplice material
designed and (4) forcapacity
load-carrying strengthofofthe thejoint line. Rcc is from
gluedetermined the lever arm of (3)
expression forces
for acting
shear
on the joint.
strength of the splice material and (4) for strength of the glue line. Rcc is the lever arm of forces acting
Rgarding
on the joint. the load-carrying capacity of the joint, the shear strength of the splice material is
determined
Regarding as follows:
the load-carrying capacity of the joint, the shear strength of the splice material is
fv,k × kmod × Atc
determined as follows: Ftc = [kN] (3)
2 × γM
𝑓 , .𝑘 .𝐴
where Atc is the active glued area of the joint, 𝐹 kN strength of the splice material. (3)
and f2.v,k𝛾 is the shear
Regarding the load-carrying capacity of the joint, the glue line strength is determined as
where Atc is the active glued area of the joint, and fv,k is the shear strength of the splice material.
Regarding the load-carrying capacity offk the × kmod ×A
joint, the
tc glue line strength is determined as
Ftc = [kN] (4)
2 × γ
𝑓 .𝑘 M.𝐴
𝐹 kN (4)
2. 𝛾
where Atc is the active glued area of the joint, and fk is the strength of the glued surface for uniform
where
and Atc is distribution
unequal the active glued areastress.
of shear of the joint, and fk is the strength of the glued surface for uniform
and unequal distribution of shear stress.
2.2.2. Screw Joints
2.2.2. Screw Joints
The maximum joint force R (see Figure 4) is based on the load-carrying capacity of the single
bc4
shear fastener and is determined
The maximum from
joint force Rbc4 (seethe following
Figure expression:
4) is based on the load-carrying capacity of the single
shear fastener and is determined from the following expression:
2Mb
Rbc = 2𝑀 [kN] (5)
𝑅 r kN (5)
𝑟
where Mb is the moment transferred by the glued joint, and r is the lever arm of the test sample.
where Mb is the moment transferred by the glued joint, and r is the lever arm of the test sample.

Figure4.4. Maximum
Figure Maximum joint
joint force—screw
force—screw joint.
joint.

Themoment
The moment transferred
transferred by joint
by the the joint onto
onto the the is
beams beams is determined
determined using the using the expression:
following following
expression:
M𝑀b = F𝐹v,Rd Rcc [kNm]
× 2 × 2 × kNm (6)
, . 2.2. 𝑅 (6)
whereFv,Rd
where Fv,Rd is
is the
the designed
designed load-carrying
load-carrying capacity for the fastener per shear plane, and Rccccisisthe
thelever
lever
armofofforces
arm forcesacting
actingon
onthe
thejoint.
joint.
Designload-carrying
Design load-carryingcapacity
capacityfor
forfastener
fastenerper
pershear
shearFFv,Rd
v,Rd is
is determined
determinedaccording
accordingto
toexpressions
expressions
giveninin[14].
given [14].

2.2.3.
2.2.3.Combination
Combinationof
ofGluing
Gluingand
andScrews
Screws
InInthe
theapplicable
applicablestandards,
standards,the thecalculation
calculation of
of load-carrying
load-carrying capacity for combined
capacity for combined joints
joints with
with
gluedand
glued andmechanical
mechanicalfasteners
fasteners isis not
not described;
described; thus,
thus, the maximum strength
strength isis not
not designated
designatedfor for
these joints. Essentially, joints of varying rigidity should
these joints. Essentially, joints of varying rigidity should not not be combined, and if they are, they should
if they are, they should
haveatatleast
have leastaasimilar
similarload-carrying
load-carryingcapacity.
capacity.
Sustainability 2020,
Sustainability 2020, 12,
12, 9288
x FOR PEER REVIEW 55 of
of 15
15

3. Results
3. Results
3.1. Laboratory Testing
3.1. Laboratory Testing
Based on laboratory test results, statistical variables were determined for each set of samples for
Based on laboratory
maximum joint test force)
force (failure results,and
statistical
verticalvariables wereofdetermined
deformation the joint. for each set of samples for
maximum joint force (failure force) and vertical deformation of the joint.
3.1.1. Glued Joints
3.1.1. Glued Joints
The mean value of the maximum force acting on the joint with glued LVL splices was Rbc = 28.86
The mean value of the maximum force acting on the joint with glued LVL splices was Rbc = 28.86 kN,
kN, and with solid timber splices it was Rbc = 30.80 kN. The mean value of vertical deformation at
and with solid timber splices it was Rbc = 30.80 kN. The mean value of vertical deformation at maximal
maximal force with glued LVL splices was 8.38 mm, and with solid timber splices it was 9.03 mm
force with glued LVL splices was 8.38 mm, and with solid timber splices it was 9.03 mm (Table 1).
(Table 1).
Table 1. Glued joints—laboratory results.
Table 1. Glued joints—laboratory results.
Force [kN] Vertical Deformation [mm]
Force [kN] Vertical Deformation [mm]
Mean
Mean 28.86
28.86 8.388.38
LVL SD 4.24 0.39
LVL SD
COV
4.24
0.15
0.390.05
COV 0.15 0.05
Mean 30.80 9.03
Solid timber
Mean
SD 30.80
6.72 9.031.24
Solid timber SD
COV 6.72
0.22 1.240.14
COV 0.22 0.14
Figure 5 shows that the deformation curves of glued joints with both types of splices were partially
Figure 5 shows that the deformation curves of glued joints with both types of splices were
linear; only in the final phase of loading did the joints start to show plastic deformation. When the
partially linear; only in the final phase of loading did the joints start to show plastic deformation.
maximum load-carrying capacity of these joints was reached, there was a sudden failure of the joint by
When the maximum load-carrying capacity of these joints was reached, there was a sudden failure
brittle fracture.
of the joint by brittle fracture.

35
GLUED JOINTS
Solid timber 30.80 kN
30
Solid timber - failure
25
LVL - failure 28.86 kN
Force [kN]

20
LVL
15
10
5
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Vertical deformation [mm]
Figure 5. Glued joints—deformation curves.
Figure 5. Glued joints—deformation curves.

Joints with
Joints with LVL
LVLsplices
splicessuffered
sufferedprimarily
primarily from
from shear
shear failure
failure of of
thethe first
first or second
or second veneer
veneer from
from the
the glue line (Figure
glue line (Figure 6). 6).
Sustainability 2020, 12, 9288 6 of 15
Sustainability 2020, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 15

(a) (b)
Figure6.6.Glued
Figure Gluedjoints
joints with
with LVL
LVL splice.
splice. (a)
(a)Typical
Typicalfailure;
failure;(b)
(b)Detailed
Detailedimage.
image.

Joints
Joints withsolid
with solidtimber
timbersplices
splicesprimarily
primarily suffered
suffered splice
splicefailure
failureinincombination
combination with
withshear
shearandand
tension
tension perpendiculartotothe
perpendicular thegrain.
grain.This
This failure
failure was
was characterized
characterizedbybycracks
cracksforming
forming inin
thethe
area of of
area thethe
glue
glue line.
line. TheThejoint
jointpredominately
predominatelyfailed
failed due
due to
to tension
tension perpendicular
perpendiculartotothethegrain.
grain.(Figure
(Figure7).7).

Figure
Figure 7.7.Glued
Gluedjoints
jointswith
withsolid
solid timber
timber splice:
splice: typical
typicalfailure
failureofofsolid
solidtimber splice.
timber splice.

3.1.2. Screw
3.1.2. Joints
Screw Joints
The
The mean
meanvalue
valueofofthe
themaximum
maximum joint
joint force for
for the
theset
setof ofsamples
sampleswith
withscrews
screws and
and LVL
LVL splices
splices
was
was RbcRbc= =16.32
16.32kN,
kN,and
andfor
forsolid
solid timber
timber splices
splices it was
was RRbcbc ==18.98
18.98kN.
kN.The
Themean
meanvalue of of
value vertical
vertical
deformationatatthe
deformation themaximal
maximalforce
force with
with screwed
screwed LVL
LVL splices
splices waswas53.61
53.61mm,
mm,andandwith solid
with timber
solid timber
splices it was 54.12 mm (Table
splices it was 54.12 mm (Table 2). 2).

Table2.2. Screw
Table Screw joints—laboratory
joints—laboratory results.
results.
Force [kN] Vertical
Force [kN]
Deformation [mm]
Vertical Deformation [mm]
Mean 16.32 53.61
Mean 16.32 53.61
LVL SD 1.94 12.78
LVL SD 1.94 12.78
COV
COV 0.12
0.12 0.25 0.25
Mean 18.98 54.12
Mean 18.98 54.12
Solid timber
Solid timber SDSD 1.73
1.73 13.2713.27
COV
COV 0.09
0.09 0.25 0.25
Sustainability 2020, 12, 9288 7 of 15

Sustainability2020,
Sustainability 2020,12,
12, xx FOR
FOR PEER
PEER REVIEW
REVIEW 77 of
of15
15
Figure 8 shows the deformation curves of this type of joint were partially linear, and then the
Figure
Figure
joint had 88 shows
ductile shows the deformation
the
behavior. deformation
Ductility is curves curves of
typical of this
for this type of
type
mechanical of joint
joint wereespecially
were
fasteners, partially linear,
partially linear, and then
and then the
for small-diameter the
joint had
joint hadthat
fasteners ductile
ductile behavior.
canbehavior.
bend. When Ductility
Ductility is typical
is
the maximum typicalload-carrying
for mechanical
for mechanicalcapacity
fasteners,
fasteners, especially
of especially
this joint was for small-diameter
for small-diameter
reached, there
fasteners that can bend. When the maximum load-carrying capacity
was a sudden failure of the joint; however, due to the use of mechanical fasteners (i.e., reached,
fasteners that can bend. When the maximum load-carrying capacity of
of this
this joint
joint was
was reached, there
screws), there
total
was a sudden
was a sudden
failure failure of
failure ofThe
was postponed. the joint;
thejoint
joint; however,
however,ductile
displayed due to the
due tobehavior,use
the use ofof
and mechanical
mechanical fasteners
fasteners
its load-carrying (i.e., screws),
(i.e., screws),
capacity total
total
was limited
byfailure
failure was postponed.
was
the mechanicalpostponed. The
joint. InThe jointphase,
joint
the final displayed
displayed ductile
ductile
excessive behavior,
behavior,
bending and
of theand itsscrews,
its
outer load-carrying
load-carrying capacity
closer tocapacity was
the centerwasof
limited
limited by
by the
the mechanical
mechanical joint.
joint. In
In the
the final
final phase,
phase, excessive
excessive bending
bending
the joint, simultaneously occurred as the splice split perpendicular to its longitudinal axis. of
of the
the outer
outer screws,
screws, closer
closer to
to the
the
center of
center of the
the joint,
joint, simultaneously
simultaneously occurred occurred as as the
the splice
splice split
split perpendicular
perpendicular to to its
its longitudinal
longitudinal axis.
axis.

SCREW JOINTS
SCREW JOINTS 18.98 kN
18.98 kN
20
20

15
15
16.32 kN
16.32 kN
Force [kN]

10
10
Solidtimber
Solid timber
Solidtimber
Solid timber -- failure
failure
55
LVL
LVL
LVL -- failure
LVL failure
00
00 10
10 20
20 30
30 40
40 50
50 60
60
Vertical deformation
Vertical deformation [mm]
[mm]
Figure 8.
Figure 8. Screw
Screw joints—deformation
joints—deformation curves.
curves.
Figure 8. Screw joints—deformation curves.

Themost
The
The mostcommon
most commontype
common typeof
type ofjoint
of jointfailure
joint failurewith
failure withscrewed
with screwedLVL
screwed LVLsplices
LVL spliceswas
splices wassplitting
was splittingperpendicular
splitting perpendicularto
perpendicular to
to
veneersat
veneers
veneers atthe
at thescrew
the screwlevel
screw level(see
level (seeFigure
(see Figure9).
Figure 9).
9).

Figure9.9.
Figure
Figure 9.Screw
Screwjoints
Screw jointswith
joints withLVL
with LVLsplice:
LVL splice:typical
splice: typicalfailures.
typical failures.
failures.

Failure
Failurefor
Failure forscrewed
for screwedsolid
screwed solidtimber
solid timbersplices
timber spliceswas
splices wasthe
was thesame
the sameas
same asthat
as thatwith
that withLVL
with LVLsplices:
LVL splices:splitting
splices: splittingwas
splitting was
was
perpendicular
perpendicularto
perpendicular toveneers
to veneersat
veneers atthe
at thescrew
the screwlevel
screw level(see
level (seeFigure
(see Figure10).
Figure 10).
10).
Sustainability 2020, 12, 9288 8 of 15
Sustainability 2020, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 15

Figure 10. Screw joints with solid timber splice: typical failure of solid timber splice.

3.1.3. Combination of Gluing and Screws

The mean value of the maximum joint force for the set of samples with a combination of gluing
and screws was Rbc = 30.40 kN for LVL splices, and for solid timber splices it was Rbc = 35.16 kN.
The mean value of vertical deformation at the maximal force was 7.68 mm for LVL splices, and
Figure 10.
10. Screw joints
joints with
with solid
solid timber
timber splice:
splice: typical
typical failure
failure of
of solid
solid timber
timber splice.
splice.
splicesScrew
Figure
for solid timber it was 10.90 mm (Table 3).
3.1.3.
3.1.3. Combination of Gluing
Gluing and
and Screws
Screws
Table 3. Combination of gluing and screw joints—laboratory results.
The
The mean
mean value
value of of the
the maximum
maximum joint
joint force
force for
for the
the set
set of
of samples
samples with
with aa combination
combination of of gluing
gluing
and screws was R = 30.40 kN for LVL Force [kN]
splices, and for Vertical
solid Deformation
timber splices it [mm]
was R = 35.16 kN.
and screws was Rbcbc = 30.40 kN for LVL bc = 35.16 kN.
bc
The
The mean
meanvalue
valueofofvertical Mean
verticaldeformation
deformation 30.04
atatthe
themaximal
maximal force
force37.78
was
was7.68 mm
7.68 mm forfor
LVLLVLsplices, andand
splices, for
solid timber
for solid splices
timber it LVL
spliceswas 10.90
it was mmSDmm
10.90 (Table 5.213).
3).
(Table 6.22
COV 0.18 0.17
Table 3. Combination of gluing and screw joints—laboratoryresults.
Table 3. Combination
Mean of gluing
35.16 and screw joints—laboratory
34.53 results.
Solid timber SD 2.67 9.19
Force
Force [kN] Vertical
[kN] Vertical Deformation
Deformation [mm]
[mm]
COV 0.08 0.28
Mean
Mean 30.04
30.04 37.7837.78
LVL
LVLincreased SD
SDeven after 5.215.21 6.22
6.22joint
Vertical deformation COV
reaching the maximal
0.18 0.17
force. The mean value of
the maximal vertical deformationCOV was 37.78 mm 0.18for LVL splices, and 0.17
with solid timber splices it was
Mean
Mean 35.16
35.16 34.5334.53
34.56 mm (Figure 11). SD 2.67 9.19
Solid timber
Figure 11 showsSolid
thattimber SD
the deformation 2.67 of this type of joint
curves 9.19
were
COV 0.08 0.28 partially linear. When the
maximum load-bearing capacity of COVthis joint 0.08
was reached, there was 0.28
a sudden failure of the joint by
brittle fracture, but total failure was delayed as a result of using mechanical fasteners (i.e., screws).
Vertical
Vertical deformation
deformation increased even after reaching
reaching the maximal joint force.
force. The mean value
value of
The joint displayed ductileincreased
behavior,even
and after
its load-bearingthecapacity
maximalwasjoint
limited Thethe
by mean
mechanical of
the
the maximal
maximal vertical
vertical deformation
deformation was
was 37.78
37.78 mm
mm for
for LVL
LVL splices,
splices, and
and with
with solid
solid timber
timber splices
splices itit was
was
joint. After the mechanical joint’s maximum load-carrying capacity was reached, the splice was split
34.56
34.56 mm (Figure
mmforce
(Figure 11).
11).
by tensile perpendicular to the fibers (brittle behavior of timber).
Figure 11 shows that the deformation curves of this type of joint were partially linear. When the
maximum load-bearing capacity of this joint was reached, there was a sudden failure of the joint by
brittle fracture,
40 COMBINATION OF GLUING AND SCREWS
but total failure was delayed as a result of using mechanical fasteners (i.e., screws).
The joint35displayed ductile behavior, and its load-bearing capacity was limited by the mechanical
joint. After 30.04 kN joint’s maximum load-carrying capacity was reached, the splice was split
30 the mechanical
by tensile25force perpendicular to the fibers (brittle behavior of timber).
Force [kN]

20 Solid timber
15
40 COMBINATION OF GLUING AND SCREWS
Solid timber - failure
10
35 LVL
5
30 30.04 kN LVL - failure
0
25
Force [kN]

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
20 Vertical deformation [mm] Solid timber
15 Solid timber - failure
10 Figure 11. Combination of gluing and screw joints—deformation curves.
Figure 11. Combination of gluing and screw joints—deformation
LVL curves.
5
Figure 11 shows that the deformation curves of this type of joint wereLVLpartially
- failure linear. When the
0
maximum load-bearing
0 5 capacity10of this joint
15 was reached,
20 there
25 was a 30
sudden failure
35 of the
40 joint by
Verticalasdeformation
brittle fracture, but total failure was delayed [mm]mechanical fasteners (i.e., screws).
a result of using

Figure 11. Combination of gluing and screw joints—deformation curves.

Sustainability 2020, 12, 9288 9 of 15

The joint displayed

Sustainability 2020, 12, x ductile
FOR PEERbehavior,
REVIEW and its load-bearing capacity was limited by the mechanical9joint.
of 15
Sustainability 2020, 12, x FORjoint’s
After the mechanical PEER REVIEW
maximum load-carrying capacity was reached, the splice was split 9 of by
15

tensile
Theforce
firstperpendicular to the
or second veneer fibers (brittle
primarily behavior
suffered of timber).
shear failure in this type of joint with LVL splicing.
The first or second veneer primarily suffered shear failure in this type of joint with LVL splicing.
The first
Thereafter, or second
splitting veneer
of the primarily
upper pressedsuffered shear tensional
and bottom failure in this
partstype of joint
of the with
splice LVL splicing.
occurred in the
Thereafter, splitting of the upper pressed and bottom tensional parts of the splice occurred in the
Thereafter, splitting of the
plane of screws (Figure 12). upper pressed and bottom tensional parts of the splice occurred in the plane
plane of screws (Figure 12).
of screws (Figure 12).

Figure 12. Combination of gluing and screws with LVL splice: typical failures of LVL splice.
Figure
Figure12.
12.Combination
Combinationof
ofgluing
gluingand
andscrews
screwswith
withLVL
LVLsplice:
splice: typical
typicalfailures
failuresof
ofLVL
LVL splice.
splice.

This type of joint with solid timber splices primarily suffered splitting in the upper pressed part
This type
This type of
ofjoint
jointwith
withsolid
solidtimber
timbersplices
splicesprimarily
primarilysuffered
suffered splitting
splitting in
in the
the upper
upperpressed
pressed part
part
of the splice in the plane of screws, while it simultaneously developed a crack from the middle
of the splice
of spliceininthe
theplane of of
plane screws, while
screws, it simultaneously
while developed
it simultaneously a cracka from
developed crackthe middle
from the element
middle
element (beam) parallel or perpendicular to the annual rings, which was the same as for solid timber
(beam) parallel or perpendicular to the annual rings, which was the same as for solid
element (beam) parallel or perpendicular to the annual rings, which was the same as for solid timbertimber splices
splices (Figure 13).
(Figure 13).
splices (Figure 13).

Combinationofof
Figure 13. Combination gluing
gluing andand screws
screws withwith
solidsolid timber
timber splice:
splice: typicaltypical failures
failures of solidoftimber
solid
Figure 13. Combination of gluing and screws with solid timber splice: typical failures of solid timber
timber
splice. splice.
splice.
3.2. Calculation According
3.2. Calculation According to
to Standards
Standards
3.2. Calculation According to Standards
3.2.1. Glued Joints
3.2.1. Glued Joints
3.2.1. Glued Joints
The maximum force of the glued joint Rbc is designated using Formulas (1) to (4), as described in
The maximum force of the glued joint Rbc is designated using Formulas (1) to (4), as described in
Section
The2.2.1.
maximum force of the glued joint Rbc is designated using Formulas (1) to (4), as described in
Section 2.2.1.
SectionThe resulting values for the maximum glued joint force (Rbc1 ) at the maximum load-carrying
2.2.1.
The resulting values for the maximum glued joint force (Rbc1) at the maximum load-carrying
capacity
The of the splice
resulting in shear
values for LVL
for the and solid
maximum timber
glued jointare shown
force (Rbc1in Table
) at the 4.maximum load-carrying
capacity of the splice in shear for LVL and solid timber are shown in Table 4.
capacity of the splice in shear for LVL and solid timber are shown in Table 4.
Table 4. Load-carrying capacity of splices in shear.
Table 4. Load-carrying capacity of splices in shear.
Quantity Unit
Quantity Unit
Ftc1 20.30 kN
LVL Ftc1 20.30 kN
LVL Mbd1 4.06 kNm
Mbd1 4.06 kNm
Sustainability 2020, 12, 9288 10 of 15

Table 4. Load-carrying capacity of splices in shear.

Quantity Unit
Ftc1 20.30 kN
LVL Mbd1 4.06 kNm
Rbc1 23.88 kN
Ftc1 18.83 kN
Solid timber Mbd1 4.02 kNm
Rbc1 23.63 kN

The resulting values for the maximum glued force at the maximum load-carrying capacity of the
glue line for LVL and solid timber are shown in Table 5 for a uniform distribution of shear stress (Rbc2 )
and in Table 6 for an unequal distribution of shear stress (Rbc3 ).

Table 5. Load-carrying capacity of the glue-line: uniform distribution of shear.

Quantity Unit
Ftc1 6.62 kN
LVL Mbd1 1.32 kNm
Rbc1 7.79 kN
Ftc1 7.06 kN
Solid timber Mbd1 1.51 kNm
Rbc1 8.86 kN

Table 6. Load-carrying capacity of the glue-line: unequal distribution of shear.

Quantity Unit
Ftc1 3.31 kN
LVL Mbd1 0.66 kNm
Rbc1 3.89 kN
Ftc1 3.53 kN
Solid timber Mbd1 0.75 kNm
Rbc1 4.43 kN

3.2.2. Screw Joints

The maximum joint force for screwed joint Rbc4 (Table 7) is designated using formulas (5) and (6)
and Johansen formulas according to [14] for determining the load-carrying capacity of one fastener per
shear plane.

Table 7. Load-carrying capacity of screwed joints.

Quantity Unit
Ftc1 3.73 kN
LVL Mbd1 1.34 kNm
Rbc1 7.89 kN
Ftc1 4.10 kN
Solid timber Mbd1 1.64 kNm
Rbc1 9.64 kN

4. Summary
Figure 14 shows a comparison of the load-carrying capacity of glued joints with LVL splices
determined using laboratory tests and calculations according to European standards. Results are
Sustainability 2020, 12, 9288 11 of 15

displayed as deformation curves, with a maximum joint force of 28.26 kN. The load-carrying capacity
of this joint type, determined using calculations according to valid standards, had three values for
LVL splices: the load-carrying capacity of splices in shear was Rbc1 = 23.88 kN, of the glue-line with
uniform distribution of shear was Rbc2 = 7.79 kN, and of the glue-line with unequal distribution of
shear was Rbc3 = 3.89 kN.
Sustainability 2020, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 15
Sustainability 2020, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 15

GLUED JOINTS - LVL

30
GLUED JOINTS - LVL
30 LVL 28.86 kN
25 LVL 28.86 kN
25 LVL - failure
23.88
20 LVL - failure
Rbc1 23.88
20
[kN]

15 Rbc1
[kN]

Rbc2
15 Rbc2
Force

10 Rbc3
Force

10 Rbc3
5 7.79
5 7.79
3.89
0 3.89
0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
0 1 2 3 Vertical
4 deformation
5 6[mm] 7 8 9 10
Vertical deformation [mm]
Figure 14. Joints with LVL splices—comparison of laboratory and calculation results.
Figure 14. Joints with LVL splices—comparison of laboratory and calculation results.
Figure 14. Joints with LVL splices—comparison of laboratory and calculation results.
Figure
Figure 15 15compares
compares thethe load-carrying
load-carrying capacity
capacity of joints
of glued gluedwith
joints
solidwith
timbersolid timber
splices splices
determined
Figure
determined 15 compares
usingtests
laboratory the load-carrying capacity
tests and according
calculations of glued joints with solid timber splices
using laboratory and calculations to according
European to EuropeanResults
standards. standards. Results
are displayed are
as
determined
displayed as using laboratory
deformation tests
curves, and
with a calculations
maximum according
joint force of to European
30.80 kN. The standards.
load-carryingResults are
capacity
deformation curves, with a maximum joint force of 30.80 kN. The load-carrying capacity of this joint
displayed
of astype,
deformation
thisdetermined
joint determinedcurves, with
using a maximum joint forcetoofvalid
calculations 30.80standards,
kN. The load-carrying capacity
type, using calculations according toaccording
valid standards, had had three
three values values
for solid for
timber
of this
solid joint
timber type, determined using
splices: the load-carrying calculations
capacity according
of splices to valid standards, had three values for
splices: the load-carrying capacity of splices in shear was Rin shear was Rbc1 = 23.63 kN, of the glue-line
bc1 = 23.63 kN, of the glue-line with uniform
solid
with timber splices: the
uniformofdistribution load-carrying capacity of splices in shear was Rbc1 = 23.63 kN, of the glue-line
distribution shear was Rof shear was Rbc2 = 8.86 kN, and of the glue-line with unequal distribution
bc2 = 8.86 kN, and of the glue-line with unequal distribution of shear was
with
of uniform Rbc3 = 4.43 kN. shear was Rbc2 = 8.86 kN, and of the glue-line with unequal distribution
distribution of
R shear was
= 4.43 kN.
ofbc3
shear was Rbc3 = 4.43 kN.

GLUED JOINTS - SOLID TIMBER

35
35
GLUED JOINTS - SOLID TIMBER 30.80 kN
Solid timber
30
Solid timber
30.80 kN
30 Solid timber - failure
25
Solid timber - failure
25 Rbc1 23.63
[kN]

20 Rbc1 23.63
[kN]

20 Rbc2
15 Rbc2
Force

15 Rbc3
Force

10 Rbc3
10 8.86
5 8.86
5 4.43
0 4.43
0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
0 1 2 3 Vertical
4 deformation
5 6[mm] 7 8 9 10
Vertical deformation [mm]
Figure 15. Screw joints with solid timber splices—comparison of laboratory and calculation results.
Figure
Figure15.
15.Screw
Screwjoints
jointswith
withsolid
solidtimber
timbersplices—comparison
splices—comparisonofoflaboratory
laboratoryand
andcalculation
calculationresults.
results.
Figure 16 compares the load-carrying capacity of screwed joints with LVL splices determined
usingFigure
Figure 16
16 compares
laboratory compares the
tests andthe load-carrying
load-carrying
calculations capacity
capacity
according toof
of screwed joints
joints with
screwed standards.
European LVL splices
withResults
LVL splices determined
determined
are displayed as
using
using laboratory
laboratory tests
tests and
and calculations
calculations according
according to
to European
European standards.
standards. Results
Results are
are displayed
displayed
deformation curves, with maximum joint force of 16.32 kN. The load-carrying capacity of this joint as
as
deformation
deformation
type curves,
was Rbc4 curves, with
with
= 7.89 kN, maximum
maximum
calculated joint force
joint force
according of 16.32
of 16.32
to valid kN. The load-carrying capacity of this joint
kN. The load-carrying capacity of this joint
standards.
type
type was
was RRbc4
bc4
==7.89
7.89kN,
kN,calculated
calculatedaccording
according to
tovalid
valid standards.
standards.
Sustainability 2020, 12, 9288 12 of 15

Sustainability 2020, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 12 of 15

Sustainability 2020, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 12 of 15

20
SCREW JOINTS - LVL
20 LVL SCREW JOINTS - LVL
LVL
15 LVL - failure
15 LVL - failure 16.32 kN
16.32 kN
[kN]

Rbc4
10
[kN]

Rbc4
10
Force

7.89
Force

5 7.89
5

0
0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
0 10 Vertical
20 deformation
30 [mm]
40 50 60
Vertical deformation [mm]
Figure 16. Screw joints with LVL splices—comparison of laboratory and calculation results.
Figure 16. Screw joints with LVL splices—comparison of laboratory and calculation results.
Figure 16. Screw joints with LVL splices—comparison of laboratory and calculation results.
Figure
Figure 17
17 compares
compares the load-carrying capacity
the load-carrying capacity of
of screwed
screwed joints
joints with
with solid
solid timber
timber splices
splices
Figure using
determined 17 compares thetests
load-carrying capacity of screwed joints with solidare
timber splices
determined using laboratory tests and calculations according to standards. Results are displayed
laboratory and calculations according to standards. Results displayed asas
determined
deformation using laboratory tests and calculations accordingThe
to standards. Results are displayed as
deformation curves,
curves, with
with maximum
maximum jointjoint force
force of
of 118.98
118.98 kN.
kN. The load-carrying
load-carrying capacity
capacity of
of this
this joint
joint
deformation
type curves, with maximum joint force
to of 118.98 kN. The load-carrying capacity of this joint
type was
was R = 9.64 kN, calculated according valid standards.
bc4 = 9.64 kN, calculated according to valid standards.
Rbc4
type was Rbc4 = 9.64 kN, calculated according to valid standards.

20
SCREW JOINTS - SOLID TIMBER
20
SCREW JOINTS - SOLID TIMBER
18.98 kN
15 18.98 kN
15 9.64
[kN]

10 9.64
[kN]

10
Force

Solid timber
Force

5 Solid timber
Solid timber - failure
5 Solid timber - failure
Rbc4
0 Rbc4
0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
0 10 Vertical
20 deformation
30 [mm]
40 50 60
Vertical deformation [mm]
Figure 17. Screw joints with solid timber splices—comparison of laboratory and calculation results.
Figure 17. Screw joints with solid timber splices—comparison of laboratory and calculation results.
Figure 17. Screw joints with solid timber splices—comparison of laboratory and calculation results.
Figure 18 shows the deformation curves of all six tested sample sets—LVL and solid timber
Figure
splices
Figure 18 shows
18 showsthe
in combination the
withdeformation
three connection
deformation curves
curves of six
oftypes:
all allgluing,
six tested
tested screws,
sample sample
and sets—LVL
sets—LVLcombination.
and solidandtimber
solid timber
splices
splices in
Figure combination
18 shows with
the three connection
deformation curvestypes: of gluing,
glued
in combination with three connection types: gluing, screws, and combination. screws,
joints and
were combination.
partially linear. When the
Figure
maximum 18 shows
load-carrying the deformation
capacity of these curves
joints of
was glued
reached,joints
there
Figure 18 shows the deformation curves of glued joints were partially linear. When the were
was partially
a sudden linear.
failure When
of the the
joint
maximum
by load-carrying
maximumfracture.
brittle load-carryingcapacity
capacityofofthesethesejoints
jointswaswas reached,
reached, there waswas
there a sudden
a suddenfailure of theofjoint
failure the
by brittle
joint fracture.
Deformation
by brittle curves of screwed joints were partially linear, and then the joint had a ductile
fracture.
Deformation
behavior. Ductilitycurves
Deformation is typical
curves of screwed
of for joints
mechanical
screwed were
were partially
jointsfasteners, linear,
especially
partially forand
linear, then
then the
small-diameter
and the joint had
had aathat
fasteners
joint ductile
can
ductile
behavior.
bend. When
behavior. Ductility is
is typical
the maximum
Ductility typical for
for mechanical
load-carrying fasteners,
fasteners,ofespecially
mechanicalcapacity this jointfor
especially was
for small-diameter
reached, there
small-diameter fasteners
was a that
fasteners can
sudden
that can
bend.
failure When
of thethe maximum
joint; however, load-carrying
due to thecapacity
mechanical of this joint
fasteners was reached,
(i.e.,
bend. When the maximum load-carrying capacity of this joint was reached, there was a sudden failure screws), there was
total a sudden
failure was
failure
postponed.of the joint; however, due to the mechanical fasteners (i.e., screws), total failure was
of the joint; however, due to the mechanical fasteners (i.e., screws), total failure was postponed.
postponed.
Figure 11shows
showsthethe deformation curves ofjoint
thistype
jointwere
typepartially
were partially linear.
Figure 11 deformation curves of this linear. When the When
maximum the
Figureload-bearing
maximum 11 shows the deformation
capacity of this curves
joint was ofreached,
this jointtheretype were
was a partially
sudden linear.
failure of When
the joint the
by
load-bearing capacity of this joint was reached, there was a sudden failure of the joint by brittle fracture,
maximum
brittle load-bearing
fracture, capacity of this joint was reached, there was a sudden failure of the joint by
but total failure butwastotal failure
delayed as awas delayed
result of usingas ascrews.
result of Theusing
jointscrews.
displayed Theductile
joint displayed
behavior, ductile
and its
brittle fracture,
behavior, and but
its total failurecapacity
load-bearing was delayed
was as a result
limited by of mechanical
the using screws. The joint displayed ductile
joint.
load-bearing capacity was limited by the mechanical joint.
behavior, and its load-bearing capacity was limited by the mechanical joint.
Sustainability 2020, 12, 9288 13 of 15
Sustainability 2020, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 13 of 15

COMPARISON OF ALL DEFORMATION CURVES

40
35
30
25
20
Force [kN]

15
10
5
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Vertical deformation [mm]
Solid timber Solid timber - failure LVL
LVL - failure Solid timber Solid timber - failure
LVL - failure LVL Solid timber
Solid timber - failure LVL LVL - failure

Figure 18. Screw joints with solid timber splices—comparison of laboratory and calculation results.
Figure 18. Screw joints with solid timber splices—comparison of laboratory and calculation results.
5. Discussion
5. Discussion
Based on the results from our laboratory measurements, one can state that glued and combined
jointsBased on thea results
displayed higher fromvaluesour
of laboratory measurements,
potential load acting on the one cancompared
joint state that glued
to thatand combined
of joints with
jointsmechanical
only displayed fasteners.
a higher values
Gluedof potential
joints alone load acting
(i.e., not on the joint
combined with compared to thatsudden
screws) suffered of joints with
failure
only mechanical
(brittle fasteners.
fracture) when Glued joints
the maximum alone
load was(i.e., not combined with screws) suffered sudden failure
reached.
(brittle
Forfracture) when
this reason, the maximum
combined load was
joints appear to bereached.
beneficial and include both the rigidity and strength
For joints
of glued this reason,
as wellcombined
as the good joints appearoftomechanical
properties be beneficial and include
fasteners due to both
their the rigidity
plastic and
behavior
strength ofwhen
(ductility) glued thejoints asload-bearing
joint’s well as the good properties
capacity of mechanical fasteners due to their plastic
is reached.
behavior (ductility)
Ductility when
is typical forthe joint’s load-bearing
mechanical capacity for
fasteners, especially is reached.
small-diameter fasteners that can bend.
TheirDuctility is typical
use is suitable for mechanical
in building structuresfasteners, especially
because, before forthe
failure, small-diameter
joints indicate fasteners
impending that can
failure
bend. Their use is suitable
by their increased deformations. in building structures because, before failure, the joints indicate impending
failure by their increased deformations.
6. Conclusions
6. Conclusions
Based on our calculations and laboratory tests, information can be acquired regarding glued, screw,
as well as combined
Based connectionsand
on our calculations of beams usingtests,
laboratory double-sided
information slices made
can of wood regarding
be acquired and wood-basedglued,
materials
screw, as wellstressed by pure connections
as combined bending without of beamsthe influence of shear force.
using double-sided slices Glued
made of splices
woodhad and higher
wood-
rigidity in comparison
based materials stressedto screwed.
by pure Brittle
bending failure of thethe
without joint occurredofbyshear
influence shearforce.
force Glued
in a layer of wood;
splices had
in the case
higher of LVL
rigidity splices, failure
in comparison to occurred
screwed. in the veneer
Brittle failureclosest
of the to theoccurred
joint glued layer (this isforce
by shear the dominant
in a layer
combined
of wood; in failure seen
the case ofby
LVLrolling shear
splices, forceoccurred
failure and tension
in theparallel
veneertoclosest
the grain).
to theThus,
glued increasing
layer (thisthe is
splice thickness
the dominant does notfailure
combined necessarily
seen byleadrolling
to increased rigidity
shear force andor bearing
tension capacity
parallel of the
to the joint.Thus,
grain). The
load-bearing
increasing thecapacity of the joint
splice thickness doesis, therefore, proportional
not necessarily to the dimensions
lead to increased rigidity orof bearing
splices, the quality
capacity of
of the adhesive and actual application of the adhesive, surface coverage, and creation
the joint. The load-bearing capacity of the joint is, therefore, proportional to the dimensions of splices, of the active
surface
the quality(epoxy two-component
of the adhesive and resin).
actual application of the adhesive, surface coverage, and creation of
It is advisable
the active to use adhesives
surface (epoxy two-component that doresin).
not show brittle failure and do not form a rigid boundary
layer,Itwhich
is advisable to use adhesives that do not due
could cause local extremes in stress show tobrittle
different wood
failure andbehaviors and the
do not form adhesive
a rigid boundaryfilm
itself
layer,(especially
which could changes
causein humidity
local extremes perpendicular
in stress due totothedifferent
grain). wood behaviors and the adhesive
In contrast,
film itself splices
(especially mechanically
changes fastened
in humidity with screws to
perpendicular have
thelower
grain).stiffness, and joint failure occurs
in theInwood splices
contrast, via tension
splices perpendicular
mechanically fastenedtowiththe grain.
screwsThe havebearing
lowercapacity
stiffness,ofand
a joint
jointdepends
failure
on many
occurs in factors.
the wood This is especially
splices true perpendicular
via tension for the tensile strength of wood
to the grain. The perpendicular
bearing capacity to the
of agrain;
joint
depends on many factors. This is especially true for the tensile strength of wood perpendicular to the
grain; the number of natural imperfections (grown wood has more imperfections than LVL boards);
Sustainability 2020, 12, 9288 14 of 15

the number of natural imperfections (grown wood has more imperfections than LVL boards); overall
dimensions and, in particular, dimensions of splices; number, arrangement, size, and quality of the
screws. The joint with mechanical fasteners shows a higher ductility than that of glued joints, which is
significant from the point of view of safety. The joint shows noticeable deformations before failure
occurs and can acoustically warn of the approaching maximum load-bearing capacity. This leaves
space for possible repair or replacement of the joint. Combined joints (gluing and screws, mechanical
fasteners) include the advantages of both methods of joining, when screws can additionally create
sufficient pressure for the glued joint in the phase of its solidification and hardening. This can lead to a
more even distribution of the adhesive and the formation of a uniform surface, which must be checked
to avoid an uneven film adhesive. This phase of jointing is very sensitive and can largely affect the
load-bearing capacity. The number of tests was limited due to time and capacity reasons, so it will
be necessary to continue verifications of the above hypotheses with a larger series of tests, including
the creation of relevant numerical models verified by standard design approaches and literature, and
validated by new physical tests.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, K.V. and A.L.; methodology, D.M., A.L. and K.V.; formal analysis, D.M.
and A.L.; test preparation and processing, K.V., D.M. and O.S.; data evaluation, K.V. and D.M.; writing—original
draft preparation, K.V., D.M. and A.L.; writing—review and editing, K.V. All authors have read and agreed on the
published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Gustafsson, J.; Serrano, E.; Aicher, S.; Johansson, C.J. Strength Design Equation for Glued-in Rods; International
RILEM Symposium Joints in Timber Structures: Stuttgart, Germany, 2001.
2. Jung, H.-J.; Song, Y.-J.; Lee, I.-H.; Hong, S.-I. Moment Resistance Performance Evaluation of Larch Glulam
Joints using GFRP-reinforced Laminated Plate and GFRP Rod. J. Korean Wood Sci. Technol. 2016, 44, 40–47.
[CrossRef]
3. Guan, Z.W. Structural Behavior of Glued Bolt Joints Using FRP; WCTE; Presses Polytechniques et Universitaires
Romandes: Lousanne, Switzerland, 1998; Volume 98, pp. 265–272.
4. Vašek, M.; Mikeš, K. The metal joints for the space timber structures, the non-linear behavior. In Proceedings
of the 5th World Conference on Timber Engineering, Montreux, Switzerland, 17–20 August 1998.
5. Lokaj, A.; Klajmonová, K. Round timber joints exposed to static and dynamic loading. Wood Res. 2014,
59, 439–448.
6. Rumlová, J.; Fojtik, R. The Timber Tie Beam: The Analysis of Spatial Framework Joint. Procedia Eng. 2015,
114, 132–139. [CrossRef]
7. Jasieńko, J.; Nowak, T.P. Solid timber beams strengthened with steel plates—Experimental studies.
In Construction and Building Materials; Elsevier Science: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2014; Volume
63, pp. 81–88.
8. Li, Y.; Cao, S.; Xue, J. Analysis on mechanical behavior of dovetail mortise-tenon joints with looseness in
traditional timber buildings. Struct. Eng. Mech. 2016, 60, 903–921. [CrossRef]
9. Serrano, E. On the Mechanical Behavior of Test Specimens for Wood-Adhesive Bonds, Report TVSM-3063; Division
of Structural Mechanics, Lund University: Lund, Sweden, 2002.
10. Noguchi, M.; Komatsu, K. Estimation of stiffness and strength in timber knee joints with adhesive and
verification by experiment. J. Wood Sci. 2006, 52, 411–421. [CrossRef]
11. Cameron, F.A.; Pizzi, A. Effect of excessive pretreatment of pine timber with CCA wood preservatives on the
bond quality of PRF and TRF wood adhesives. Holz Roh- Werkst. 1985, 43, 149–151. [CrossRef]
12. Stoeckel, F.; Konnerth, J.; Gindl-Altmutter, W. Mechanical properties of adhesives for bonding wood—A
review. Int. J. Adhes. Adhes. 2013, 45, 32–41. [CrossRef]
13. Pizzo, B.; Lavisci, P.; Misani, C.; Triboulot, P. The compatibility of structural adhesives with wood. Holz Roh-
Werkst. 2003, 61, 288–290. [CrossRef]
Sustainability 2020, 12, 9288 15 of 15

14. Eurocode 5, 2006: Design of Timber Structures—Part 1-1: General—Common Rules and Rules for Buildings
(European Standard).
15. CSN 73 1702, 2007: Design of Timber Structures—General Rules for Buildings (Czech National Standard).

Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional
affiliations.

© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).