5.

5 Variation of load rate

Conditions: polished steel plate; load rate 1, 10 and 100 mm/min;
attachment by rough plate; contact pressure 0.3, and 5 MPa; normal
moisture content; fiber direction 90°.

a) 0.3 MPa b) 5 MPa

Figure 5.9: Dependence of the coefficient of friction on different loading

rate for fiber direction of 90°.

Figure 5.10: Typical plot of the coefficient of friction over time for a load
rate of 100 mm/min under low contact pressure 0.3 MPa for LVL.

The results from the experiments with different load rate show that the
coefficient of friction changes significantly under low pressure as can be
seen in Figure 5.9a, showing very high values at a rate of 100 mm/min.
Figure 5.10 allows a more detailed look into the evolution of the coefficient

36
of friction over the course of a single test under this high load rate. It shows
that there is a pronounced peak with a coefficient of friction of approx. 0.58
but the ratio between vertically and horizontally applied forces immediately
drops afterwards to levels of around 0.20, the level that has been observed
for the other load rates.

When the high pressure (5 MPa) is applied, the coefficient of friction is less
influenced by the different loading rate, see Figure 5.9b.

37
6. Discussion
This thesis studies influencing parameters on the coefficient of friction
between wood and steel surfaces. The parameters chosen for the
experiments were contact pressure, moisture content, fiber direction,
roughness of the steel plate and loading rate.

The research of the issue results in the following findings:

The coefficient of friction changes due to a variation of the parameters. Big

differences are observed mainly under lower contact pressure. However,
under higher contact pressure the coefficient of friction does not show big
changes (Chapter 5.1).

In the experiment with different moisture content it is again clear that the
value of the coefficient of friction is lower under high contact pressure than
it is when low contact pressure is applied. The coefficient of friction is still
increasing with increasing moisture content for all tested contact pressures.

Other proof of the influence of high pressure on the coefficient of friction is

the experiment with different fiber directions. The results show that under
low contact pressure (0.3 MPa) the coefficient of friction ranges between
0.15 and 0.30, whereas under high contact pressure the coefficient of friction
ranges between 0.12 and 0.22.

Fundamentally influencing the coefficient of friction is the use of the

sandblasted rough steel sliding plate in comparison with the smooth steel
sliding plate. The experiments proved significant changes of the values of
the coefficient of friction for all applied combinations, where the coefficient
of friction was almost tripled on the rough steel sliding plate.

The coefficient of friction for the three tested wood materials (LVL, PW,
PN) only showed slight differences and the shapes of the curves were very
similar for all three wood types.

The results of the experiments used in this thesis are enclosed in the
appendix.

38
7. Conclusions
The results obtained in the experimental part correspond to the expected
outcomes, for example an increasing coefficient of friction with increasing
moisture content of the specimens was found.

While using the sandblasted rough sliding plate the measured coefficients of
friction were almost doubled in comparison to the smooth sliding plate. The
importance of the roughness of the steel in dowel connections was tested in
(Sjödin et al, 2008), where the outcomes showed that using dowels with
higher surface roughness increased the load bearing capacity of the
connection.

It becomes clear that the coefficient of friction is influenced by more factors

and by multiple factors at the same time and that it would be useful to
conduct deeper research into this topic and carry out more experiments with
more combinations that are shown to be most influential (for example
moisture content and steel plate roughness) on the coefficient of friction.

Considering the machine set-up and the experiment itself it could be

beneficial to create and try out new ways of attaching the wood specimen to
the bearing place (by for example gluing) to see how much the set-up is
influenced by the attachment of the specimen.

It is important to continue with research on this topic. It is obvious that the

changes of coefficient of friction are significant and might be influential for
the calculation and design of timber constructions. The aim should be to
integrate the coefficient of friction into Eurocode 5.

39
References
American Forest & Paper Association (1997): General Dowel Equations for
Calculating Lateral Connection Values. American Wood Council
Available at: http://www.awc.org/pdf/tr12.pdf [Accessed 2014-05-28]

Eurocode 5 (2004): Eurocode 5 – Design of timber structures. EN 1995-1-

1:2004(E)

Glass, S.V. and Zelinka, S.L. (2010): Moisture Relations and Physical
Properties of Wood. General Technical Report FPL-GTR-190
Available at: http://www.fpl.fs.fed.us/documnts/fplgtr/fplgtr190/chapter_04.pdf
[Accessed 2014-03-01]

Hanousek, J. and Charamza, P. (1992): Moderni metody zpracovani dat (engl.:

Modern methods of data processing). Praha, GRADA 1992

Hart, M. (2011): Tribology Makes the World Go ´Round.

Available at: https://www.asme.org/engineering-
topics/articles/tribology/tribology-makes-the-world-go-round [Accessed 2014-
02-11]

Jost, H.P. (1966): Lubrication: Tribology; Education and Research; Report on

the Present Position and Industry's Needs (submitted to the Department of
Education and Science by the Lubrication Engineering and Research) Working
Group, H.M. Stationery Office, 1966

Johannson, M. et al. (2011): Design of timber structures. Swedish Forest

Industries Federation, ISBN: 978-9-637-0055-2

Kretschmann, David E. (1999): Mechanical properties of wood, General

Technical Report FPL-GTR-190
Available at: http://www.fpl.fs.fed.us/documnts/fplgtr/fplgtr190/chapter_05.pdf

McKenzie, W.M. and Karpovich, H. (1968): The Frictional Behavior of Wood,

Wood Science and Technology, Vol. 2, pp.138-152

MTS System Corporation (2004).

Available at: http://www.mts.com/en/index.htm. [Accessed 2014-03-01]

Murase, Y. (1980) Frictional properties of wood at sliding speed. Mokuzai

Gakkaishi 26:61-65

Ning, G, et al. (1982): The Friction between some common Swedish wood
species and steel. Royal Institute of Technology, Wood Technology and
Processing, Stocholm. Trita TRT 0019

40
Persson, B.N.J. (2000): Sliding friction Physical Principles and Applications.
Springer-Verlag, Berlin. Heidelberg

Rabinowicz, E. (1995): Friction and Wear Materials, 2nd edition, John Wiley
and Sons, New York

Seki, M. et al (2012): Wood friction characteristics during exposure to high

pressure: influence of wood/metal tool surface finishing conditions. The Japan
Wood Research Society (2013) 59:10-16, DOI 10.1007/s10086-012-1295-1

Sjödin J, Serrano E, Enquist B (2008): An experimental and numerical study of

the effect of friction is single dowel joints. Holz Roh. Werkst. 66:363-372

Sujeet K. Sinha (2010): Engineering Materials in Mechanical Design –

Principles of Selection with Q & A, Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur,
India. ISBN: 978-981-08-2314-6

Van Beek, A. (1995): History of Science Friction.

Available at: http://www.tribology-abc.com/abc/history.htm [Accessed 2014-02-
11]

Wikipedia (2014): Friction.

Available at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friction. [Accessed 2014-02-25]

Wood Solutions (2013): Laminated Veneer Lumber (LVL).

Avaible at: http://www.woodsolutions.com.au/Wood-Product-
Categories/Laminated-Veneer-Lumber-LVL [Accessed 2014-03-15]

Department of Natural Resources (2013): The Physical and Mechanical

Properties of Wood. Department of Natural Resources, Nova Scotia, Canada.
Available at: http://woodlot.novascotia.ca/content/lesson-two-physical-and-
mechanical-properties-wood [Accessed 2014-02-11]

41
Appendices
Appendix A: The scheme of a MTS Frame machine 320.
Appendix B1: Plots for pressure variation.

(a)

(b)

Figure B1.1: Pressure variation at 0° fiber direction for PW (a) and PN (b).
 (a)

(b)

(c)

Figure B1.2: Pressure variation at 90° fiber direction for LVL (a), PW (b) and
PN (c).
Appendix B2: Plots for moisture content variation

(a) LVL (b) PW (c) PN

Figure B2.1: Moisture content variation for 0° fiber direction, 0.3 MPa contact
pressure.

(a) LVL (b) PW (c) PN

Figure B2.2: Moisture content variation for 0° fiber direction, 5 MPa contact
pressure (no data for normal moisture).