European Journal of Wood and Wood Products

, Volume 72, Issue 5, pp 601–607 | Cite as

Bending properties of a novel engineered composite from southern pine lumber

  • Bonnie Z. Yang
  • R. Dan Seale
  • Joseph Dahlen
  • Rubin Shmulsky
  • P. David Jones


This paper presents the results of a study in which novel engineered composite lumber was developed, manufactured and tested. The engineered composite lumber was made by edge-laminating lower-grade No. 3 solid-sawn southern pine (SP) lumber with higher-grade tension chord material to yield tension chord lumber (TCL). Three groups of TCL (38 mm × 235 mm × 4.9 m) were made with varying combinations of SP lumber including machine stress rated (MSR) 2400Fb-2.0E, MSR 2400Fb-2.0E finger joint, and visually graded No. 1 finger joint material. One group of visually graded No. 3 control lumber (38 mm × 184 mm × 4.9 m) was also tested. All specimens were tested in static four-point bending on a universal testing machine. The modulus of elasticity (MOE) and modulus of rupture (MOR) were determined. The TCL lumber had significantly greater MOE values as compared with the control lumber. The mean MOE values of TCL ranged from 12.4 to 12.6 GPa, as compared with 9.6 GPa for the control group. The mean MOR values of TCL ranged from 39.3 to 47.6 MPa, as compared with 35.9 MPa for the control group. Perhaps most importantly, the 5th percentile values of MOR of the TCL were approximately double those of the control group, 29.1, 27.0, and 27.4 MPa versus 11.8 MPa, respectively.


Ultimate Bearing Capacity Resorcinol Formaldehyde Linear Variable Displacement Transducer Southern Pine Reinforcement Lumber 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



The author wish to acknowledge the support of U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), Research, Education, and Economics (REE), Agriculture Research Service (ARS), Administrative and Financial Management (AFM), Financial Management and Accounting Division (FMAD) Grants and Agreements Management Branch (GAMB), under Agreement No. 5B-0202-4-00. Any opinions, findings, conclusion, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the view of the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Gratitude is also expressed to Momentive Speciality Chemicals Inc. for their donation of resin.


  1. ASTM Standard D198-08 (2009) Standard Methods of static tests of timbers in structural sizes. American Society for Testing and Materials, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  2. Buchanan AH (1990) Bending strength of lumber. J Struct Eng 116:1213–1229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bulleit WM (1983) Reinforcement of wood materials: a review. Wood Fiber Sci 16(3):391Google Scholar
  4. Clouston P, Schreyer A (2006) Wood concrete composites: A structurally efficient material option. Civil Engineering Practice. Boston Society of Civil Engineers (BSCE) Section/American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), 5-22Google Scholar
  5. Clouston P, Bathon LA, Schreyer A (2005) Shear and bending performance of a novel wood–concrete composite system. J Struct Eng 131(9):1404CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dahlen J, Jones PD, Seale RD, Shmulsky R (2012) Bending strength and stiffness of in-grade Douglas-fir and southern pine No.2 2 × 4 lumber. Can J For Resour 42:858–867CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Dahlen J, Jones PD, Seale RD, Shmulsky R (2013) Stiffness and strength of on-grade southern pine No. 2 wide dimension lumber. Forest Products Society 67th International Convention. Austin, TX. June 9–11Google Scholar
  8. Fiorelli J, Dias AA (2003) Analysis of the strength and stiffness of timber beams reinforced with carbon fiber and glass fiber. Mater Res 6:193–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Johns KC, Lacroix S (2000) Composite reinforcement of timber in bending. Can J Civ Eng 27:899–906CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kakeh M, Dahlen J, Shmulsky R, Jones PD, Seale RD (2012) Bowtie Beams: novel Engineered Structural Beams from Southern Pine Lumber. Wood Fiber Sci 44(3):1–9Google Scholar
  11. Nolan R (2010) Determining allowable design values for wood. American Forest and Paper Association and American Wood CouncilGoogle Scholar
  12. Raftery GM, Harte AM (2011) Low-grade glued laminated timber reinforced with FRP plate. Compos B Eng 42(4):724–735CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. SFPA (2013) Southern pine use guide. Southern Forest Products AssociationGoogle Scholar
  14. US Census Bureau (2012) Lumber production and mill stocks: 2010. Accessed June 27, 2012

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bonnie Z. Yang
    • 1
  • R. Dan Seale
    • 1
  • Joseph Dahlen
    • 2
  • Rubin Shmulsky
    • 1
  • P. David Jones
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Sustainable BioproductsMississippi State UniversityMississippi StateUSA
  2. 2.Warnell School of Forestry and Natural ResourcesUniversity of GeorgiaAthensUSA

Personalised recommendations