Wood Science and Technology

, Volume 37, Issue 1, pp 59–77 | Cite as

Composite behavior of laminated strand lumber

Original

Abstract

The mechanical properties of laminated strand lumber are dependent on the orientation of strands and on the variability of strand alignment in the production process. A model is proposed to predict the in-plane properties and their statistical distributions to allow manufacturers to set target reliability levels for their products. The model is based on the theory of mechanics of composites and assumes homogeneity in each panel layer to allow for multiple-layer panels to be simulated. To verify the model, five types of panels are fabricated using aspen strands with the following stacking sequences: (a) fully-oriented (0° throughout); (b) fully-random (R throughout); (c) random core/oriented surfaces (0°/R/R/0°); (d) random surfaces/oriented core (R/0°/0°/R); and (e) eight oriented layers (0°/+45°/−45°/0°/0°/−45°/+45°/0°). In-plane elastic moduli and ultimate strengths (in tension, compression, and shear) are determined for each panel type. Model predictions match well with experimental results. Properties are shown to be dependent on the degree of strand alignment in each panel type. Using the first-order reliability method, statistical distributions on the properties were predicted and found to compare well with experimental results. A method is proposed for dealing with misalignment of strands based on the von Mises distribution of strand angles to assist manufacturers with production process optimization.

References

  1. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) (1991a) ASTM D103. Standard test methods of evaluating the properties of wood-base fiber and particle panel materials. West Conshohocken, USAGoogle Scholar
  2. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) (1991b) ASTM D143. Standard methods of testing small clear specimens of timber. West Conshohocken, USAGoogle Scholar
  3. Bendtsen BA, Porter S (1978) Comparison of results from standard 2-inch with 1–1/2-inch shear block tests. For Prod J 28:54–56Google Scholar
  4. Bradtmueller JP, Hunt MO, Fridley KJ, McCabe GP (1997) Mechanical properties of OSB via the five-point bending test. For Prod J 47:70–77Google Scholar
  5. Cowin SC (1979) On the strength anisotropy of bone and wood. J Appl Mech ASME Trans 46:832–837Google Scholar
  6. Foschi RO, Barrett JD (1976) Longitudinal shear strength of Douglas-fir. Can J Civ Eng 3:198–208Google Scholar
  7. Foschi RO, Folz B, Yao F, Li H (1997) RELAN: Reliability analysis user's manual. Department of Civil Engineering, Univ of British Columbia, Vancouver, CanadaGoogle Scholar
  8. Hindman D (1999) Elastic constants of selected engineered wood products. Thesis, Pennsylvania State Univ, State College, USAGoogle Scholar
  9. Hoover WL, Hunt MO, Lattanzi RC, Bateman JH, Youngquist JA (1992) Modelling mechanical properties of single-layer, aligned, mixed-hardwood strand panels. For Prod J 42:12–18Google Scholar
  10. Hunt MO, Hoover WL, Fergus DA (1985) Thick aspen structural flakeboard. For Prod J 35:33–39Google Scholar
  11. Hunt MO, Suddarth SK (1974) Prediction of elastic constants of particleboard. For Prod J 24:52–57Google Scholar
  12. Kaw AK (1997) Mechanics of composite materials. CRC, New York Google Scholar
  13. Liu JY (1984) Evaluation of the tensor polynomial strength theory for wood. J Comp Mat 18:216–226Google Scholar
  14. McNatt JD, Bach L, Wellwood RW (1992) Contribution of flake alignment to performance of strandboard. Forest Prod J 42:45–50Google Scholar
  15. Moses DM, Prion HGL (1999) The influence of strand alignment on the mechanical properties of aspen laminated strand lumber. Internal report, Dept Civil Engineering, Univ of British Columbia, Vancouver, CanadaGoogle Scholar
  16. Shaler SM (1991) Comparing two measures of flake alignment. Wood Sci Technol 26:53–61Google Scholar
  17. Tsai SW, Wu EM (1971) A general theory of strength for anisotropic materials. J Comp Mater 5:58–80Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • D. M. Moses
    • 1
  • H. G. L. Prion
    • 2
  • H. Li
    • 4
  • W. Boehner
    • 3
  1. 1.Equilibrium Consulting Ltd.VancouverCanada
  2. 2.Department of Civil EngineeringUniversity of British ColumbiaVancouverCanada
  3. 3.Trus Joist—A Weyerhaeuser BusinessBoiseUSA
  4. 4.Power Labs Inc.SurreyCanada

Personalised recommendations