Ubc - 1980 - A7 H35 - 4

BEHAVIOUR OF.
WOOD UNDER COMPRESSION
PERPENDICULAR'TO GRAIN'LOADING
by
Christopher Percival Hall
Sc., The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia, 1976
THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF
THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
MASTER OF APPLIED SCIENCE
in
THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES
Department o f C i v i l Engineering
We a c c e p t t h i s t h e s i s as c o n f o r m i n g
to the required standard
THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA
O c t o b e r 1980
© C h r i s t o p h e r P e r c i v a l H a l l , 1980
In p r e s e n t i n g t h i s thesis in p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t o f the requirements f o r
an advanced degree at the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, I agree that
the Library shall make i t freely available for r e f e r e n c e and study.
I f u r t h e r agree t h a t p e r m i s s i o n f o r e x t e n s i v e copying o f this thesis
for s c h o l a r l y purposes may be granted by the Head of my Department or
by h i s representatives. It is understood that copying or p u b l i c a t i o n
of this thesis f o r f i n a n c i a l gain s h a l l not be allowed without my
written permission.
Department o f
The University of B r i t i s h Columbia

2075 W e s b r o o k P l a c e
V a n c o u v e r , Canada
V6T 1W5
Date o-J- mo
ABSTRACT
Present methods of determining design values for compression perpen-
d i c u l a r to grain involves the t e s t i n g of specimens of one s p e c i f i c geometry.
The geometry of this test i s very d i f f e r e n t from the geometries of bearing
conditions occurring i n practice. It was hypothesized that t h i s test does
not represent actual bearing conditions i n practice and the object of t h i s
thesis was to f i n d a more representative method of designing for compression
perpendicular to grain.
This thesis found the behaviour of wood i n compression perpendicular to
grain loading i s strongly dependent on geometry i n both the l i n e a r and
nonlinear ranges of applied loading. A f i n i t e element a n a l y t i c a l model,
v e r i f i e d by testing, was used for the analysis. The analysis found the
d e f l e c t i o n i s strongly dependent on the modulus of e l a s t i c i t y perpendicular
to grain and nearly independent of other material properties. Also the
capacity was found to be dependent on a c h a r a c t e r i s t i c material term and only
weakly dependent on other material properties.
A design method, one which includes an estimate of the d e f l e c t i o n of the
bearing plate, was developed from the results of t h i s research. This pro-
posed design method i s v a l i d f o r the capacities of the d i f f e r e n t geometries
of bearing conditions occurring i n p r a c t i c e .

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page No
ABSTRACT i i
LIST OF TABLES v
LIST OF FIGURES vi
LIST OF SYMBOLS ix
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT X
CHAPTER 1 - INTRODUCTION 1
CHAPTER 2 - TESTING AND ANALYSIS IN THE ELASTIC RANGE 3
2.1 Introduction . 3
2.2 Testing 3
2.3 Dimensional A n a l y s i s 5
2.4 F i n i t e Element Model 8
2.5 Material Properties 9
2.6 Comparison o f Test R e s u l t s with F i n i t e Element P r e d i c t i o n s 10
2.7 Results 12
2.8 Beam on E l a s t i c Foundation 13
CHAPTER 3 - TESTING AND ANALYSIS BEYOND THE ELASTIC RANGE 17
3.1 Introduction 17
3.2 Material Properties 17
3.3 Testing 18
3.4 Nonlinear F i n i t e Element Model 19
3.5 V a r i a t i o n of M a t e r i a l P r o p e r t i e s 20
3.6 Comparison o f T e s t R e s u l t s w i t h F i n i t e Element P r e d i c t i o n s 21
3.7 Results 22
3.8 A n a l y s i s o f A p p l i e d S t r e s s e s and Geometry 23
3.9 Internal Stress Analysis 25

Page No.
CHAPTER 4 - PROPOSED DESIGN METHOD 30
4.1 Introduction 30
4.2 Bearing Conditions i n P r a c t i c e 31
Design C o n s i d e r a t i o n s f o r Geometry E f f e c t s 33
4.3
D e t a i l s o f t h e Proposed Design Method 34

4.4
4.4a Design f o r S t r e s s 34
4.4b Estimate of the D e f l e c t i o n 36
4.4c Design P h i l o s p h y 37
4.4d L i m i t a t i o n s o f t h e Proposed Design Method 38
Design Examples 40
4.5
Comparing t h e Proposed Design Method w i t h t h e M o d i f i c a t i o n 44

4.6
F a c t o r s o f CSA STANDARD 086
45
CHAPTER 5 - SUMMARY
47
REFERENCES
48
APPENDIX A
V
LIST OF TABLES
Page No.
TABLE I E l a s t i c Test Data 51
TABLE II E l a s t i c Testing Data i n Dimensionless Form 53
TABLE III Values and Ratios for the Material Properties 54
TABLE IV Effect of Varying Ratios f o r the Material Properties 55
TABLE V Comparison of the Stress @ 0.2% Offset for Specimens 56

with Different Material Properties
TABLE VI Comparing the D i f f e r e n t i a l Deflection to the Average 57

Deflection of the Bearing Plate
vi
LIST OF FIGURES
Page No.
Fig. 1 ASTM Test Arrangement 58
Fig. 2 D e f i n i t i o n of the Proportional Limit 58
Fig. 3 E l a s t i c Testing Samples 59
Fig. 4 General Test Arrangement 60
Fig. 5 Typical Load Deflection Plot 61
Fig. 6 Data from Specimen A2 62
Fig. 7 Data from Specimen A4 63
Fig. 8 Data from Specimen B2 64
Fig. 9 F i n i t e Element Grid 65
Fig. 10 E /E Vs. Geometry from F i n i t e Elements 66
Fig. 11 F i n i t e Element and Testing Comparison Specimen A2 67
Fig. 14 F i n i t e Element and Testing Comparison Specimen B2 70
Fig. 15 F i n i t e Element and Test Data Comparison 71
Fig. 16 Geometry of Other Load Configurations 72

_L 3.
Fig. 19 Beam on E l a s t i c Foundation Model 75
Fig. 20 Beam on E l a s t i c Foundation and F i n i t e Element Comparison 76
Fig. 21 Relations Between Two Configurations 77
Fig. 22 Beam on E l a s t i c Foundation and F i n i t e Element Comparison 78
F i g . 23 Beam on E l a s t i c Foundation and F i n i t e Element Comparison 79
Fig. 24 Selected Material Properties 80
Fig. 25 Relationship of Specimens i n a Sample 81

Page No.
Fig. 26 Stress Versus Strain - Testing Specimens C1 and C3 82
F i g . 27 Stress Versus Strain - Testing Specimens D1 and D3 83
Fig. 28 Stress Versus Strain - Testing Specimens E1 and E3 84
Fig. 29 Stress Versus Strain - Testing Specimens F1 and F3 85
Fig. 30 Stress Vs. Strain -• Specimen 2 each Sample 86
F i g . 31 Load-Deflection Curve from Computer Programme 87
F i g . 32 Program Flow Chart 88
F i g . 33 Stress Vs. Strain F i n i t e Element Runs 89
Fig. 34 Specimen C2 and F i n i t e Element Comparison 90
F i g . 35 Specimen D2 and F i n i t e Element Comparison 91
Fig. 36 Specimen E2 and F i n i t e Element Comparison 92
F i g . 37 Specimen F2 and F i n i t e Element Comparison 93
Fig. 38 Input Material Properties 94
F i g . 39 Applied Stress Vs. Strain F i n i t e Elements 95
Fig. 42 Applied Stress Vs. Strain F i n i t e Elements 98
F i g . 51 D e f i n i t i o n of the Offset Method 107
F i g . 52 Stresses @ 0.2% Offset Vs. Geometry 108

viii
Page No.
F i g . 53 D e f i n i t i o n of 0 109
o
Fig. 54 N o r m a l i z e d S t r e s s @ 0.2% O f f s e t Vs. Geometry 110
F i g . 55 Normalized S t r e s s @ 0.2% O f f s e t Vs. Geometry 111
F i g . 56 N o r m a l i z e d S t r e s s § 0.2% O f f s e t Vs. Geometry 112
F i g . 57 I n t e r n a l S t r e s s at the 0.2% O f f s e t L e v e l of Applied 113

Stress
F i g . 58 I n t e r n a l S t r e s s at the 0.2% O f f s e t L e v e l of Applied 114

Stress
F i g . 59 I n t e r n a l S t r e s s a t the 0.2% O f f s e t L e v e l of Applied 115

Stress
F i g . 60 Percentage of A p p l i e d Load R e s i s t e d by Shear a t the 116

0.2% O f f s e t
F i g . 61 Contour L i n e s of S t r e s s P e r p e n d i c u l a r to Grain 117

D i v i d e d by A p p l i e d S t r e s s
F i g . 62 Comparison of the Type I C o n f i g u r a t i o n and a Configuration 118

w i t h a Free Lower Boundary
F i g . 63 E c c e n t r i c i t y of Load f o r No R o t a t i o n of B e a r i n g Plate 119
F i g . 64 R e d e f i n i t i o n of Terms f o r the C e n t e r l i n e Loaded Case 120
F i g . 65 Comparison of the C a p a c i t y of the Type I and Type I I 121

Configurations
F i g . 66 N o r m a l i z e d S t r e s s @ 0.2% O f f s e t Vs. Geometry 122
F i g . 67 Compression P e r p e n d i c u l a r t o G r a i n Design Curve 123
F i g . 68 D e f i n i t i o n of Geometric Terms f o r Design Curve 124
F i g . 69 E r r o r i n Estimated Deflection 125
F i g . 70 Beam f o r Design Examples 126
F i g . 71 Comparison of Proposed Method and Modification Factors 127

o f CSA 086
F i g . A1 Element Configuration 128
F i g . A2 Freebodies of Element 129
F i g . A3 Constant S t r e s s i n X - D i r e c t i o n 130
F i g . A4 Forces and D e f l e c t i o n s f o r Bending 130

F i g . A5 G l o b a l Degrees of Freedom 131
ix
LIST OF SYMBOLS
b = specimen o r beam width
D = specimen o r beam depth
d = beam depth f o r Beam on E l a s t i c Foundation analysis
E^ = modulus o f e l a s t i c i t y p a r a l l e l t o g r a i n
E^ = modulus o f e l a s t i c i t y p e r p e n d i c u l a r t o grain
E = apparent modulus o f e l a s t i c i t y p e r p e n d i c u l a r t o grain

a
G = shear modulus
K = f o u n d a t i o n modulus f o r Beam on E l a s t i c Foundation a n a l y s i s , s t i f f n e s s
matrix
L = specimen o r beam length
H = bearing plate length
P = applied load
P = applied load defined by 0.2% o f f s e t

u
Y = shear s t r a i n
A = deflection
A = d e f l e c t i o n @ load P
u u
e = s t r a i n p a r a l l e l to grain
= s t r a i n perpendicular to grain
U,.w P.., = P o i s s o n s ' r a t i o s

111 111
a = s t r e s s a t the p r o p o r t i o n a l limit
P
a = stress p a r a l l e l to grain
0^ = stress perpendicular to grain
a = stress defined by 0.2% o f f s e t when f u l l c r o s s - s e c t i o n i s loaded

o
T = shear stress
t = ultimate shear s t r e s s
u
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I would l i k e t o thank my a d v i s o r s , P r o f e s s o r s R.F. Hooley and Borg
Madsen, f o r t h e i r support and encouragement i n completing this thesis. I
would a l s o l i k e t o thank t h e many people who helped i n c r e a s e my enjoyment
d u r i n g my s t a y a t t h e U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia.
Funding f o r t h i s r e s e a r c h was p r o v i d e d by a grant from t h e N a t i o n a l
Research C o u n c i l o f Canada.
BEHAVIOUR OF WOOD UNDER COMPRESSION PERPENDICULAR TO GRAIN LOADING
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
Allowable s t r e s s e s used i n North America f o r compression perpendicular
t o g r a i n i n wood have been d e r i v e d by u s i n g ASTM t e s t procedure D143-52 . 1
T h i s procedure i n v o l v e s t h e t e s t i n g o f 2"x2"x6" specimens f a b r i c a t e d
from d e f e c t - f r e e m a t e r i a l . The l o a d i s a p p l i e d over t h e middle t h i r d o f t h a t
s u r f a c e which i s p e r p e n d i c u l a r t o t h e growth r i n g s as shown i n F i g u r e 1.
The design s t r e s s i s obtained by d i v i d i n g t h e average s t r e s s a t t h e
p r o p o r t i o n a l l i m i t , as d e f i n e d i n F i g u r e 2, by a f a c t o r o f 1.5. To determine
the d e s i g n s t r e s s , t h e t e s t i s c a r r i e d o u t u s i n g green m a t e r i a l (moisture
content above f i b e r s a t u r a t i o n ) . I f the m a t e r i a l i s used i n t h e d r y c o n d i -
t i o n , the design s t r e s s can be m u l t i p l i e d by a f a c t o r o f 1.5. The d e t a i l e d
procedure f o r d e t e r m i n i n g allowable s t r e s s i s d e s c r i b e d i n ASTM D245-69 .
The response o f wood t o compression p e r p e n d i c u l a r to grain loading i s
however g r e a t l y a f f e c t e d by the geometry o f t h e specimen and t h e l o a d i n g
configuration. The ASTM method, where o n l y o n e - t h i r d o f t h e s u r f a c e i s
loaded, does not y i e l d a u n i v e r s a l measure o f the compression perpendicular
to grain strength. The t e s t r e s u l t s a r e t h e r e f o r e not s u i t a b l e t o d i r e c t l y
d e s c r i b e the behaviour o f p r a c t i c a l cases where wood i s s u b j e c t e d t o compres-
sion perpendicular t o g r a i n with other l o a d c o n f i g u r a t i o n s .
The ASTM t e s t g i v e s a s m a l l e r d e f l e c t i o n a t any s t r e s s l e v e l than would
be o b t a i n e d with the f u l l s u r f a c e loaded. The c o n f i g u r a t i o n s found i n
p r a c t i c e are s u b s t a n t i a l l y d i f f e r e n t from t h a t o f the ASTM t e s t . The d e s i g n
procedure used-does however, t o some e x t e n t , a l l o w f o r t h i s by p e r m i t t i n g an
- 1 - .
- 2 -
i n c r e a s e i n the a l l o w a b l e s t r e s s e s f o r those cases where the l e n g t h o f bear-
ing i s l e s s than s i x i n c h e s . T h i s approach however does not a d e q u a t e l y
r e f l e c t the c a p a c i t i e s of the v a r i o u s geometries o c c u r r i n g i n p r a c t i c e .
The purpose of t h i s i n v e s t i g a t i o n i s to.attempt t o develop a more encom-
p a s s i n g method f o r d e t e r m i n a t i o n o f wood's c a p a c i t y t o w i t h s t a n d loads a c t i n g
perpendicular to grain.
The s t e p s taken t o develop such a method a r e :
1) Conduct t e s t s which would g i v e r e l e v a n t i n f o r m a t i o n of wood's
behaviour when s u b j e c t e d t o compression perpendicular to grain.
2) Use d i m e n s i o n a l a n a l y s i s t o develop a c o n v e n i e n t way of
p r e s e n t i n g the d a t a .
3) Prepare an a n a l y t i c a l f i n i t e element model and use i t f o r
p r e d i c t i n g the behaviour of wood.
4) Compare and v e r i f y the r e s u l t s from the f i n i t e element analysis
with those o b t a i n e d from the tests.
5) Use the f i n i t e element method t o p r e d i c t the behaviour of
other l o a d i n g configurations.
The above s t e p s were executed f o r both the e l a s t i c range and the
inelastic range.
In a d d i t i o n , a comparison was made w i t h another a n a l y t i c a l model - t h e
beam on e l a s t i c f o u n d a t i o n - i n the e l a s t i c range o n l y .
Finally, a p r o p o s a l i s made f o r a new d e s i g n method f o r compression
p e r p e n d i c u l a r t o g r a i n l o a d i n g c o n d i t i o n t o g e t h e r w i t h some examples o f i t s
use.
- 3 -
CHAPTER 2
TESTING AND ANALYSIS IN THE ELASTIC RANGE
2.1 Introduction
T h i s c h a p t e r o u t l i n e s two a n a l y t i c a l methods ( f i n i t e elements and beam
on an e l a s t i c foundation) f o r d e t e r m i n i n g the l i n e a r l o a d response f o r com-
p r e s s i o n p e r p e n d i c u l a r t o g r a i n and t h e i r v e r i f i c a t i o n by t e s t s . The c h a p t e r
begins w i t h a d e s c r i p t i o n o f the method used f o r t e s t i n g i n the l i n e a r range
and a p r e s e n t a t i o n of the t e s t r e s u l t s o b t a i n e d . T h i s i s f o l l o w e d by a
d e s c r i p t i o n of an a n a l y t i c a l model, based upon f i n i t e elements, t o g e t h e r w i t h
b e h a v i o u r p r e d i c t i o n s o b t a i n e d from t h i s model. The problem i s a l s o m o d e l l e d
as a beam on an e l a s t i c f o u n d a t i o n i n o r d e r t o d e s c r i b e the behaviour i n a
s i m p l i f i e d manner.
2.2 Testing
Compression p e r p e n d i c u l a r t o g r a i n t e s t s were performed on a Baldwin
t e s t i n g machine a v a i l a b l e i n t h e C i v i l Engineering l a b o r a t o r i e s at the
U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia. The l o a d s were r e c o r d e d from the l o a d indi-
c a t o r on the machine and the d e f l e c t i o n s were measured with d i a l gauges. Two
d i a l gauges were used t o e l i m i n a t e p o s s i b l e e r r o r s due t o r o t a t i o n o f the
loading head.
T e s t specimens were produced from two p i e c e s of timber, A and B. Both
timbers were from the s p e c i e s group, r e f e r r e d t o as Hem-Fir, consisting of
Western Hemlock, A m a b i l i s F i r and Grand F i r . Timber A y i e l d e d the f o u r
specimens A1, A2, A3 and A4, w h i l e timber B was used f o r the t h r e e specimens
B1, B2 and B3 as shown i n F i g u r e s 3a and 3b.

- 4 -
The s i x i n c h l o n g specimens, A1 and A3, were t e s t e d with 100% of their
c r o s s - s e c t i o n a l area loaded to f i n d the modulus o f e l a s t i c i t y E and the
s t r e s s a t the p r o p o r t i o n a l l i m i t a f o r the timber. Specimens A2 and A4
were used f o r t e s t i n g d i f f e r e n t geometries of l o a d i n g . Different lengths
Z of b e a r i n g p l a t e s and d i f f e r e n t depths D were used. The d i f f e r e n t depths
were o b t a i n e d by successively reducing the specimen by sawing and p l a n i n g i t .
F i g u r e 4 shows the general t e s t arrangement. The applied stresses P/(b£.)
d u r i n g t h e s e t e s t s d i d not exceed a .
P
T h i s t e s t procedure was s e l e c t e d f o r two reasons:
1) t o examine the l i n e a r b e h a v i o u r of compression perpendicular
to grain loading f o r various geometries.
2) t o compare the t e s t r e s u l t s w i t h the b e h a v i o r p r e d i c t e d by an
a n a l y t i c a l models.
The depth of specimen A2 was reduced by sawing s t r i p s of wood o f f the
top p o r t i o n of the specimen, hence a new s u r f a c e was t e s t e d at each depth.
T h i s was done t o minimize p o s s i b l e e r r o r s due t o damage from t e s t i n g but on
the other hand produced a d i f f e r e n t g r a i n s t r u c t u r e f o r each t e s t . Addi-
t i o n a l t e s t i n g showed t h a t a specimen c o u l d be loaded s e v e r a l times without
the r e s u l t s changing. Hence i t was concluded t h a t any damage o c c u r r i n g
d u r i n g t e s t i n g d i d not s i g n i f i c a n t l y e f f e c t the r e s u l t s and i n the subsequent
specimens the same s u r f a c e was t e s t e d at each depth. At the depth of 4.13",
specimen A2 was rotated 180° about i t s l o n g a x i s and retested. The depth of
specimen A4 was reduced by sawing a p o r t i o n of wood o f f the bottom, so the
same s u r f a c e was t e s t e d a t each depth. The r e s u l t s from t e s t i n g specimen A4
are more c o n s i s t e n t than the r e s u l t s from specimen A2 where a d i f f e r e n t
s u r f a c e was t e s t e d each time.
Specimens B1 and B3 were t e s t e d w i t h 100% of t h e i r c r o s s - s e c t i o n area
loaded to f i n d E| and a n f o r the sample. Specimen B2 was also tested

- 5 -
w i t h s e v e r a l depths D using d i f f e r e n t lengths I o f b e a r i n g p l a t e s a t each
depth. The a p p l i e d s t r e s s was always l e s s than o^. To reduce the depth,
the bottom p o r t i o n was sawn o f f , so the same s u r f a c e was t e s t e d a t each
depth.
For each t e s t t h e l o a d P was p l o t t e d a g a i n s t t h e d e f l e c t i o n A and
P/A was o b t a i n e d from the s t r a i g h t l i n e p o r t i o n o f the graph. Figure 5
shows a t y p i c a l t e s t p l o t . The curve s t a r t s out w i t h an upward c u r v a t u r e b u t
then s t r a i g h t e n s out t o d e s c r i b e a l i n e a r r e l a t i o n s h i p between s t r e s s and
strain. A p o s s i b l e explanation f o r the i n i t i a l c u r v a t u r e i s t h a t t h e wood
s u r f a c e under the b e a r i n g p l a t e i s not p e r f e c t and o n l y h i g h spots are b e i n g
compressed i n i t i a l l y . A uniform pressure d i s t r i b u t i o n i s f i n a l l y a t t a i n e d
and t h e l i n e becomes s t r a i g h t .
The d e t a i l e d r e s u l t s o f t h e t e s t s a r e shown i n T a b l e I . T a b l e Ia shows
the f o u r t e s t s c a r r i e d out t o o b t a i n m a t e r i a l i n f o r m a t i o n f o r the s p e c i f i c
t i m b e r s w h i l e Table l b shows t h e 64 t e s t s conducted with v a r y i n g bearing
p l a t e l e n g t h s and d i f f e r e n t depths.
In t h e succeeding a n a l y s i s , E^ = 58 k s i f o r sample A and E^ = 5 2 . 9
ksi f o r sample B a r e used. These v a l u e s a r e t h e average E^ determined from
t h e two t e s t s o f each timber.
2.3 Dimensional A n a l y s i s
Dimensional a n a l y s i s was used i n o r d e r t o f i n d a c o n v e n i e n t form i n
which t o p r e s e n t the d a t a . The f i r s t p a r t of a dimensional a n a l y s i s i n v o l v e s
t h e e s t a b l i s h m e n t o f those parameters o r combinations o f parameters which
a f f e c t the problem. In t h i s case, the d e f l e c t i o n A of the loading c o n f i g -
u r a t i o n shown i n F i g u r e 4 i s w e l l d e s c r i b e d by the 10 parameters shown
below.
A = f ( P , I, D, L, b, Ej_, E n , G, y X l 1 , 2 , 1
- 6 -
where A = average d e f l e c t i o n under t h e b e a r i n g plate
P = t o t a l applied load
I = l e n g t h of the b e a r i n g plate
D = depth of the specimen
L = l e n g t h of the specimen
b = width of the specimen e q u a l t o the width of the b e a r i n g
plate
E = modulus of e l a s t i c i t y p e r p e n d i c u l a r to grain
'1
E^ = modulus o f e l a s t i c i t y p a r a l l e l t o t h e g r a i n
G = shear modulus
U , * V .., = Poissons' r a t i o s
111, 111
Dimensional a n a l y s i s s t a t e s f u r t h e r t h a t i f t h e 11 v a r i a b l e s o f e q u a t i o n
2.1 contain two d i m e n s i o n a l u n i t s , i n t h i s case f o r c e and l e n g t h , then 11-2
o r 9 independent d i m e n s i o n l e s s groups can be formed. I t i s only required
t h a t each v a r i a b l e must be used a t l e a s t once. The n i n e d i m e n s i o n l e s s groups
are a r b i t r a r y but i n t h i s case the f o l l o w i n g were chosen:
Ab£E, _ (% D b P _l , ^1
E
,, J 1 2 2
— " F
D' L ' D' b £ E , ' E,« G ' l l T
l y M
111
PD 1 1 1
E q u a t i o n 2.2 can be f u r t h e r reduced by the f o l l o w i n g considerations;
1) The m a t e r i a l relationship
E
^x-| 1
= E
-| 1^111 shows t h a t t h e
f o u r parameters of the r e l a t i o n s h i p are not independent. One
o f the four must t h e r e f o r e be removed from e q u a t i o n 2.2.
Arbitrarily, V-. , w i l l be removed.

111
A
2) The problem we are i n v e s t i g a t i n g i s assumed t o be two dimen-
sional. That i s , the e f f e c t s o f P o i s s o n expansion normal t o
the p l a n e of l o a d i n g and out o f p l a n e b u c k l i n g are ignored.
( B u c k l i n g was not observed d u r i n g testing). Therefore, the
term b/D i s disregarded.

- 7 -
3) The term P/(b£E,) i s an average s t r a i n under t h e l o a d . Since
the response i n t h e l i n e a r range i s independent o f t h i s actual
s t r a i n , t h i s term may be e l i m i n a t e d from the l i s t .
4) A new term, E , t h e apparent modulus o f e l a s t i c i t y f o r

cl
compression p e r p e n d i c u l a r t o g r a i n , i s now d e f i n e d such t h a t
_ P/(b&) _ Mean s t r e s s p e r p e n d i c u l a r t o g r a i n
a A/D Mean s t r a i n p e r p e n d i c u l a r t o g r a i n
The term Ab£E./(PD) simplifies to E./E . T h i s expresses the r a t i o o f

X .L 3.
the s t i f f n e s s o f t h e m a t e r i a l l o a d e d over t h e f u l l c r o s s - s e c t i o n a l area to
the apparent s t i f f n e s s o f the m a t e r i a l l o a d e d over a p a r t o f t h i s a r e a . This
r a t i o s h o u l d be and i s l e s s than 1.0 because i f l e s s than t h e f u l l cross
s e c t i o n i s loaded i t takes a h i g h e r a p p l i e d s t r e s s t o produce the same
deflection.
In l i g h t o f t h e above c o n s i d e r a t i o n s , e q u a t i o n 2.2 can be r e s t a t e d a s :
E, „ £ D E
l E
l
1 = F I— r
, — , — , , u, 1 2.3
— K
D' L E ' G 111 ;
E 11
a
The r a t i o o f m a t e r i a l s t i f f n e s s E^ and t h e apparent s t i f f n e s s E^ i s thus
a f u n c t i o n o f two geometric terms £/D and D/L as w e l l as t h e t h r e e
material property ratios E^/E , E^/G and ^j^-j*
It w i l l be assumed t h a t the response i s o n l y weakly dependent on t h e
m a t e r i a l terms E / E ^ , E^/G and ^-J-J a n d

t h a t t h e r a t i o s do n o t change
much f o r t h e wood r e p o r t e d i n t h i s r e s e a r c h . The assumption o f t h e weak
dependence o f the m a t e r i a l terms on the response w i l l be checked l a t e r . Then
e q u a t i o n 2.3 can be reduced t o :
E - F l
D' L J
a
T a b l e I I shows t h e t e s t data f o r each timber i n t h i s form.
The d i m e n s i o n a l a n a l y s i s has thus p r o v i d e d us w i t h a c o n v e n i e n t form i n
which t o p r e s e n t t h e t e s t i n f o r m a t i o n g r a p h i c a l l y .
- 8 -
P l o t s of E /E versus i/D f o r d i f f e r e n t values of D/L a r e shown i n
-L ci
F i g u r e s 6 t o 8 f o r specimens A2, A4 and B2, respectively. Each graph shows
t h a t the r a t i o of E /E increases with i n c r e a s i n g values of i/D and D/L.

•i- EL
These t r e n d s are more c o n s i s t e n t f o r specimens A4 and B2 than f o r A2.
The likely reason f o r t h i s i s t h a t specimen A4 and B2 were both t e s t e d on the
same s u r f a c e , i . e . r e d u c t i o n of depth was accomplished by c u t t i n g the bottom
s u r f a c e , w h i l e A2 had some of the c u t s made on the s u r f a c e where the bearing
p l a t e was placed.
2.4 F i n i t e Element Model
The l o a d response f o r compression p e r p e n d i c u l a r t o g r a i n loads can be
s t u d i e d i n s e v e r a l ways.
One way would be t o conduct comprehensive t e s t s . However, such a method
would be v e r y expensive s i n c e so many l o a d c o n f i g u r a t i o n s would have t o be
i n v e s t i g a t e d and many r e p l i c a t i o n s of each c o n f i g u r a t i o n would have t o be
conducted i n order to get c o n c l u s i v e results.
Another method would be t o p o s t u l a t e the behaviour with an analytical
model and v e r i f y i t for representative cases.
An a n a l y t i c a l model u s i n g a F o u r i e r s e r i e s s o l u t i o n t o the elasticity
equations c o u l d be used but i t i s d i f f i c u l t to i n c o r p o r a t e r e a l i s t i c boundary
conditions. I t would a l s o be d i f f i c u l t t o extend the F o u r i e r s e r i e s s o l u t i o n
beyond the e l a s t i c range.
Another method, and the one chosen, i s t o use a f i n i t e element model.
T h i s method can accommodate a v a r i e t y of boundary c o n d i t i o n s and geometries
and lends i t s e l f f o r e x t e n s i o n s i n t o the n o n - l i n e a r range. The member m a t r i x
for the element used i s d e s c r i b e d i n Appendix A.
F i g u r e 9 shows d e t a i l s of the f i n i t e element g r i d used i n the modelling
of the g e n e r a l t e s t arrangement of F i g u r e 4. Only o n e - h a l f of the configura-

- 9 -
t i o n need be analyzed because of the symmetry of the specimen.
Figure 9 shows further d e t a i l s of the f i n i t e element grid used i n the
model. The grid has 10 elements with d i f f e r e n t depths through the depth D.
When (&/D) x (D/L) > 0.2, 18 or 20 elements, each with the same length, were
used along the length L/2. However, f o r (&/D) x (D/L) < 0.2, 20 elements,
with d i f f e r e n t lengths, were used through the length L/2. This was done i n
order to make sure enough elements were present d i r e c t l y below the bearing
plate. A minimum of four equal length s t e e l elements with a depth of
approximately 0.3D were used for the bearing plate.
On the bottom boundary, the specimen cannot move i n the y-direction but
i s free to move i n the x-direction ( f r i c t i o n l e s s contact). On the l e f t side
boundary the specimen i s free to move i n the y-direction but i s fixed i n the
x-direction. The specimen can move freely on the right side boundary and
that i s also the case for the unloaded portion of the top. Under the bearing
plate, the specimen must conform to the shape of the bearing plate i n the
y-direction but i s free to move i n the x-direction ( f r i c t i o n l e s s contact).
F i n i t e element models with adhering surfaces were examined and i n several of
these cases the surface shear stress was greater than the normal stress. The
c o e f f i c i e n t of f r i c t i o n was thus exceeded and movement between the wood
surface and the s t e e l surface would occur. However, the differences i n the
response E /E f o r the adhering cases and geometrically similar f r i c t i o n -

J- a
less cases were less than 5%. F r i c t i o n l e s s surfaces were used since the
discrepancy which could be caused by the f r i c t i o n was small.
2.5 Material Properties
The values for the material properties used i n the f i n i t e element
analysis are shown i n Table I I I , together with those for the test samples.
Of these values, E^ i s measured d i r e c t l y while E^, G and have

- 10
been s e l e c t e d as r e p r e s e n t a t i v e v a l u e s . The numerical v a l u e s used i n the
f i n i t e element a n a l y s i s are somewhat d i f f e r e n t from those of the test
specimens, but g i v e the same r a t i o s o f E^/E^, E^/G and ^j^-j* A s s n o w n
i n S e c t i o n 2.3, i t i s o n l y the r a t i o s of the m a t e r i a l p r o p e r t i e s which are
i m p o r t a n t when the r e l a t i o n s h i p s between E./E , l/D and D/L are t o be

j- a
investigated.
S i n c e the r a t i o s of E
j ^ / E
1 1 ' E^/G and V L 1 1 were s e l e c t e d , one can
expect these r a t i o s t o be d i f f e r e n t from the a c t u a l unknown r a t i o s of the
t e s t samples. I t i s t h e r e f o r e u s e f u l t o examine what e f f e c t changing the
r a t i o s has on the response E./E .
Three t y p i c a l geometries were chosen as o u t l i n e d i n Table IVa. The value
of the r a t i o s E./E , E,/G and y,__ were i n t u r n a l t e r e d by 25% to see

1 a 1 111
by how much the r a t i o of E./E would change. The r e s u l t s are shown i n T a b l e
IVb. I t was found t h a t the 25% change i n the m a t e r i a l r a t i o s caused a change
in E /E of o n l y 3%.
_L Ci
I t i s concluded from t h i s t h a t the response E./E i s i n s e n s i t i v e to

j- a
changes i n the m a t e r i a l p r o p e r t i e s and that i t i s acceptable t o use the
s e l e c t e d v a l u e s o f the m a t e r i a l f o r a wide range of specimens. This further
justifies u s i n g s e l e c t e d r a t h e r than measured v a l u e s of E

-j^» G a n d
în
t o compare the t e s t and f i n i t e element r e s u l t s . This also j u s t i f i e s neglect-
ing the dimensionless m a t e r i a l terms of e q u a t i o n 2.3 i n section 2.3.
2.6 Comparison of T e s t R e s u l t s w i t h F i n i t e Element P r e d i c t i o n s
The g e n e r a l r e l a t i o n s h i p p r e d i c t e d by the f i n i t e element a n a l y s i s between
E./E and Z/D i s shown i n F i g u r e 10 f o r d i f f e r e n t v a l u e s of D/L f o r the

•i> cl
indicated loading condition.
S p e c i f i c f i n i t e element p r e d i c t i o n s were made f o r each of the conditions
for which t e s t s were made. These are shown i n F i g u r e s 11 t o 14. Here the
- l i -
t e s t d a t a i s superimposed on the f i n i t e element r e s u l t s i n o r d e r t o q u a n t i f y
the a c c u r a c y of the p r e d i c t i o n . Figure 11 shows the r e s u l t s of specimen A2
for D/L = 0.39 and 0.26. E i g h t of the t e n p o i n t s are w i t h i n 10% of the
p r e d i c t e d v a l u e s but two of the p o i n t s d i f f e r by 40%. F u r t h e r data for
specimen A2 i s shown i n F i g u r e 12. Here the t e s t data i s p l o t t e d f o r D/L =
0.17, 0.13, 0.089 and 0.048 t o g e t h e r with a s i n g l e f i n i t e element p r e d i c t i o n
line calculated for D/L = 0.13. The values c a l c u l a t e d by the f i n i t e element
method f o r the f o u r r a t i o s of D/L a l l p l o t on the same l i n e . T h i s shows
t h e e f f e c t on the response E /E o f changing D/L i s i n s i g n i f i c a n t when

cl
D/L i s small. The line calculated for D/L = 0.13 can t h e r e f o r e be con-
s i d e r e d r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of a l l f o u r r a t i o s . On t h i s graph, o n l y s i x of the 20
t e s t s show a d i f f e r e n c e from the p r e d i c t e d v a l u e s g r e a t e r than 10%.
The comparison f o r specimen A4 i s shown i n F i g u r e 13. Here o n l y f o u r o f
the 19 data p o i n t s d i f f e r e d by more than 10% from the p r e d i c t e d v a l u e s .
Figure 14 shows the r e s u l t s from specimen B2 and t h a t 3 of the 12 data
p o i n t s d e v i a t e by more than 10%.
Three of the t e s t data p o i n t s have £/D v a l u e s too l a r g e t o show on the
graphs. They a r e the t e s t s with £/D = 4.31 f o r specimen A2 and H/D = 5.16
and 3.76 f o r specimen A4. The d i f f e r e n c e s between these t e s t s and their
f i n i t e element p r e d i c t i o n s were approximately 5%, 30% and 15%, r e s p e c t i v e l y .
O v e r a l l , the p e r c e n t d i f f e r e n c e between the t e s t r e s u l t s and the pre-
d i c t i o n s by the f i n i t e element method i s shown as a histogram i n Figure 15a.
Twenty-nine of the 64 p o i n t s or 45% are w i t h i n 5% of the p r e d i c t e d v a l u e s
w h i l e 47 or 73% are w i t h i n 10%. However, F i g u r e 15b shows the same r e s u l t s
e x c l u d i n g the t e s t s where a d i f f e r e n t s u r f a c e was t e s t e d a t each depth
(specimen A2). In t h i s graph o n l y two o f the 33 data p o i n t s i s d i f f e r e n t
from the p r e d i c t e d v a l u e by more than 15%.

While the agreement cannot be deemed o u t s t a n d i n g , i t i s nevertheless
acceptable when one c o n s i d e r s the d i f f i c u l t i e s encountered i n measuring the
- 12 -
very small d e f l e c t i o n s which occur i n the e l a s t i c range. This i s p a r t i c u -
larly t r u e f o r t e s t s with small D/L ratios. More than h a l f the cases where
the d i s c r e p a n c y was greater than 10% are from the 18 t e s t s with s m a l l D/L
ratios.
In l i g h t of the above, i t i s c o n c l u d e d t h a t the suggested f i n i t e element
method g i v e s a c c e p t a b l e p r e d i c t i o n s of wood's compression p e r p e n d i c u l a r to
g r a i n b e h a v i o u r i n the linear range.
2.7 Results
S i n c e the finite element method was shown t o be an a c c e p t a b l e model f o r
t h e a n a l y s i s o f the c o n f i g u r a t i o n o f F i g u r e 4 ( g e n e r a l t e s t arrangement), the
a n a l y s i s i s now extended t o examine the two configurations shown i n Figure
16. These models are more a p p l i c a b l e to practical bearing conditions
o c c u r r i n g at the ends of simple beams than the type I configuration
(centerline loaded).
In both cases shown i n F i g u r e 16, the l o a d i s a p p l i e d t o a r i g i d bearing
p l a t e which i s l o c a t e d a t the end of a member. Figure 16a shows a
c o n f i g u r a t i o n r e f e r r e d t o as type I I where the l o a d i s a p p l i e d o f f the center
o f the b e a r i n g p l a t e i n a manner such t h a t the d e f l e c t i o n under the bearing
p l a t e i s constant (no r o t a t i o n of the p l a t e o c c u r s ) . Figure 16b shows
another c o n f i g u r a t i o n r e f e r r e d t o as type I I I where the load i s applied to
the center of the b e a r i n g p l a t e and the p l a t e i s a l l o w e d t o r o t a t e . When
p r e d i c t i o n s o f d e f l e c t i o n are made i t i s the average d e f l e c t i o n under the
r i g i d plate that i s calculated.
As b e f o r e , the surfaces between the wood and the b e a r i n g plate and
between the wood and the lower boundary were c o n s i d e r e d frictionless.
Figure 17 shows the r e l a t i o n between E /E , £/D and D/L f o r type I I

-1- 3.
(the no r o t a t i o n c a s e ) . Figure 18 shows the same f o r type I I I ( r o t a t i o n o f
- 13 -
the b e a r i n g p l a t e i s a l l o w e d ) . Type I I i s t h e s t i f f e r o f the two c o n f i g u r a -
tions.
2.8 Beam on E l a s t i c Foundation
Thus f a r , t e s t i n g and a n a l y s i s have produced o n l y graphs f o r t h e
response o f the system t o l o a d . C l o s e d form e x p r e s s i o n s f o r t h e curves have
n o t been developed. Curve f i t t i n g c o u l d be used t o p r o v i d e such an e q u a t i o n
but t h i s would not add f u r t h e r t o the u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f the behaviour of the
system. With t h i s i n mind, t h e author i n v e s t i g a t e d s e v e r a l a n a l o g i e s . One
of these c o n s i d e r e d the l o a d t o be h e l d by a t i g h t l y s t r e t c h e d top layer of
wood as i n a t r a m p o l i n e . However, t h i s model d i d not d u p l i c a t e t h e t e s t
r e s u l t s o r , f o r t h a t matter, the a n a l y t i c a l r e s u l t s . Another analogy
c o n s i d e r e d was t h a t a t o p l a y e r o f wood a c t e d as a beam s p r e a d i n g t h e l o a d t(
the lower p o r t i o n o f t h e specimen. T h i s can be modelled as a beam on an
e l a s t i c f o u n d a t i o n where the beam has depth d as shown i n F i g u r e 19 and t h e
elastic f o u n d a t i o n i s p r o v i d e d by compression perpendicular t o grain i n the
lower region. The beam depth d which i s unknown w i l l be found by curve
f i t t i n g the r e s u l t s from the f i n i t e element method.
Hetenyi 3
g i v e s the d e f l e c t i o n A o f t h e beam o f F i g u r e 19 as:
A = —
KF
where X (k/4EI) 1/4
I moment o f i n e r t i a ( i n ) o f t h e beam o f depth

4
d
E modulus o f e l a s t i c i t y o f the beam ( k s i )
K f o u n d a t i o n modulus ( k s i )
( s i n h 2Xa + s i n 2Xa)/(cosh X a + c o s X a ) + Xi
2 2
a (L - i)/2 ( i n )
P a p p l i e d l o a d (k)
- 14 -
For the case o f F i g u r e 19, t h e f o l l o w i n g h o l d s :
I = bd /12 3
b = beam width
E = E
1 1
K = E b/D i
The f o u n d a t i o n modulus K i s somewhere between E b/D and E b/(D-d)
but Ejb/D was chosen as i t g i v e s a c l o s e r f i t t o a n a l y t i c results.
A combination o f the above e x p r e s s i o n s y i e l d s :
E /E ± a = [1 + V (D/£) ( E ^ / S E ^ 1 7 4
(d/D) ' ] 3 4 - 1
where W = ( s i n h 23 + s i n 2 3 ) / ( c o s h 3 2
+ cos 3) 2
and 3 = [(3/16) (EÊ^) (L/D - Z/D) k

{D/d) ]3 1/k
where 0 = 2.0 f o r 3 > 3
T h i s c l o s e d form e x p r e s s i o n f o r t h e response shows t h a t :
E /E = ± a f(E /E
± 1 1 , l/D, D/L, d/D)
The s i n g l e unknown d/D was found from curve f i t t i n g t o be near 0.17.
F i g u r e 20 shows the comparison o f the beam on e l a s t i c foundation r e s u l t s f o r
d/D = 0.17 with t h e f i n i t e element r e s u l t s o f F i g u r e 10.
F i g u r e 20 i n d i c a t e s t h a t the beam on e l a s t i c f o u n d a t i o n model p r e d i c t s
t h e l i n e a r response t o l o a d f o r compression perpendicular to grain reasonably
w e l l f o r t h i s type I c o n f i g u r a t i o n .
The same model can be a p p l i e d t o t h e end l o a d e d case o f F i g u r e 16a type
II (no r o t a t i o n ) . I f the c e n t e r l i n e loaded case i s c u t i n two, as shown i n
F i g u r e 21, each h a l f approximates t h e end l o a d e d case with no r o t a t i o n o f the
bearing plate. The beam on e l a s t i c foundation a n a l y s i s , therefore, approxi-
mates t h e l o a d c o n f i g u r a t i o n o f F i g u r e 16a and t h e e q u a t i o n f o r t h e response
is:
:
E./E = [1 + 0 (D/21) (E../3E. (d/D) ^]" 3 1
l a 11 i
where 0 = ( s i n h 23 + s i n 2 3 ) / ( c o s h 3 2
+ cos 8) 2
- 15 -
and f3 = [3 ( E j / E ^ ) (L/D - (D/d) ] 3 1 / l +
where 0 = 2.0 f o r 6>3.
A d i s c r e p a n c y i s i n t r o d u c e d by u s i n g h a l f o f t h e type I c e n t e r l i n e
loaded c o n f i g u r a t i o n as r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f the end b e a r i n g c o n d i t i o n . Type I
does n o t p e r m i t movements i n t h e specimen normal t o the c e n t e r l i n e w h i l e this
can occur i n the f r e e edge o f the end b e a r i n g case. Because o f t h i s , a t o t a l
match i s not o b t a i n e d . F o r t h i s case i t was found by curve f i t t i n g t h a t a
r a t i o of d/D = 0.13 gave good r e s u l t s .
F i g u r e 22 shows t h e comparison o f t h e beam on e l a s t i c foundation
a n a l y s i s with d/D = 0.13 and the curves from the f i n i t e element a n a l y s i s o f
F i g u r e 17. The graph i n d i c a t e s t h a t t h e beam on e l a s t i c f o u n d a t i o n model
with d/D = 0.13 p r e d i c t s t h e response i n a r e a s o n a b l e manner.
The beam on e l a s t i c f o u n d a t i o n a n a l y s i s f o r t h e end l o a d e d f r e e rotation
c o n f i g u r a t i o n o f F i g u r e 16b, type I I I , has no simple g e n e r a l e q u a t i o n f o r t h e
response to load. However, i f B = [ S E ^ E ^ (L/D - i/D) 4

(D/d) ] 3 1 / t f
is
g r e a t e r than 3.0, t h e problem i s s i m p l i f i e d . U s i n g e q u a t i o n s from Hetenyi,
the response i s :
E
l _ r 6a + 6 a 2
+ 3a 3 +
a
h
>,
a 3 + 6a + 6 a z
+ 4a 3
+ a H
where a = (3E /E
± 1 ) 1 M
(D/d) 3 M
U/D)
F i g u r e 23 shows t h a t when d/D = 0.4 and D/L = 0.0, t h e beam on
e l a s t i c f o u n d a t i o n p r e d i c t s t h e response reasonably well.
The comparisons o f the t h r e e l o a d c o n f i g u r a t i o n s show t h a t t h e l i n e a r
response t o l o a d f o r compression p e r p e n d i c u l a r t o g r a i n can be c l o s e l y des-
c r i b e d by a beam on e l a s t i c f o u n d a t i o n model. The e q u a t i o n s show t h e
response E^/E^ i s i n s e n s i t i v e t o changes i n the r a t i o s o f the v a l u e s f o r
the m a t e r i a l p r o p e r t i e s , s i n c e o n l y t h e f o u r t h r o o t o f t h e term E^/E^ i s
used. T h i s s u b s t a n t i a t e s the r e s u l t s o f S e c t i o n 2.5 where t h e e f f e c t o f

- 16 -
v a r y i n g the r a t i o s o f t h e m a t e r i a l p r o p e r t i e s i n t h e f i n i t e element model was
investigated.
F o r two o f t h e t h r e e l o a d c o n f i g u r a t i o n s , t h e beam on e l a s t i c f o u n d a t i o n
a n a l y s i s p r o v i d e s r e l a t i v e l y simple equations f o r approximations to the
curves o f E /E versus £/D and D/L. F o r example, f o r t h e type I

J_ EL
c e n t e r l i n e l o a d e d c o n f i g u r a t i o n when i/D i s l e s s than 1.0 and D/L i s less
than 0.3 the beam on e l a s t i c f o u n d a t i o n formula reduces t o :

E /E = 1/(1 + 0.89 D/l) 2.4
-L cl
For t h e end b e a r i n g type I I c o n f i g u r a t i o n (no r o t a t i o n ) when i/D i s less
than 1.0 and D/L i s l e s s than 0.3 and d/D = 0.13 the formula reduces t o :
E./E = 1/(1 + 0.36 D/£) 2.5

X ci
In both these e q u a t i o n s , E^/E^ e q u a l t o 0.0417 i s used. These
e q u a t i o n s w i l l be used l a t e r t o p r e d i c t t h e d e f o r m a t i o n o f b e a r i n g p l a t e s .
- 17 -
CHAPTER 3
TESTING AND ANALYSIS BEYOND THE ELASTIC RANGE
3.1 Introduction
T h i s chapter expands the p r e v i o u s l y described work i n t o the i n e l a s t i c
range. An a n a l y t i c a l model i s p r e s e n t e d which p r e d i c t s how wood behaves when
subjected t o compression p e r p e n d i c u l a r to grain loads.
The chapter begins with a d e s c r i p t i o n of t e s t s c a r r i e d out and a p r e s e n -
t a t i o n o f the t e s t r e s u l t s . An a n a l y t i c a l model u s i n g a n o n l i n e a r finite
element system i s then p r e s e n t e d and the r e s u l t s p r e d i c t e d by the model a r e
described and compared w i t h the t e s t s . The model i s subsequently used t o
p r e d i c t the n o n l i n e a r behaviour of some other load configurations.
D i f f e r e n c e s i n the a p p l i e d s t r e s s v e r s u s s t r a i n curves as a f u n c t i o n of
geometry are observed. The a n a l y t i c a l model i s f i n a l l y used t o examine t h e s e
differences.
3.2 Material Properties
In t h e e l a s t i c range i t was s u f f i c i e n t t o d e s c r i b e each m a t e r i a l p r o -
p e r t y by a s i n g l e v a l u e . However, beyond the p r o p o r t i o n a l l i m i t i t i s neces-
s a r y t o know the r e l a t i o n s h i p s between s t r e s s and s t r a i n up t o f a i l u r e i n
order t o p r e d i c t compression p e r p e n d i c u l a r t o g r a i n behaviour analytically.
The 0^ versus e r e l a t i o n s h i p was o b t a i n e d from p h y s i c a l t e s t i n g
w h i l e the r e l a t i o n s h i p f o r a„_ versus and x v e r s u s y were

11 11
s e l e c t e d as r e p r e s e n t a t i v e curves f o r t h e s p e c i e s used. The r e l a t i o n s h i p s
were r e p r e s e n t e d as the e l a s t i c p l a s t i c m a t e r i a l p r o p e r t i e s shown i n
F i g u r e 24. The curves were assumed t o be t h e same f o r t e n s i o n o r compression

- 18 -
and i n the case of shear the same f o r p o s i t i v e or negative shear.

The material used i n the test was from the species group Hem-Fir con-
s i s t i n g of Western Hemlock, Amabilis F i r and Grand F i r . Representative
values for this species group were obtained from the Wood Handbook . 4
3.3 Testing
Four wood blocks (C, D, E and F) of the Hem-Fir species group were
tested. Three specimens (1, 2 and 3) were cut from each block as indicated
i n Figure 25. The specimens were dry, having a moisture content i n the range
of 10 to 12%. As i n the previous work, a Baldwin t e s t i n g machine was used.
The loads were obtained from the load indicator while the deformations were
read off d i a l gauges. The strain rate used was approximately 0.01 in/in/min.
Specimens 1 and 3 were loaded over t h e i r f u l l top surface area to obtain
stress versus s t r a i n curves for compression perpendicular to grain for each
block.
Figure 26 shows the results for Specimen C1 and C3 along with a curve
representing the "average" behaviour of the two specimens. This curve,
consisting of three linear portions, w i l l be used to represent the material
relationships i n the subsequent f i n i t e element analysis. The same i s shown
for blocks D, E and F i n Figures 27, 28 and 29, respectively.
The curves for Specimens 1 and 3 d i f f e r substantially despite the fact
that the two specimens were cut from the same block i n d i c a t i n g that v a r i -
a b i l i t y i n the nonlinear range i s large.
Specimen 2 of each block was loaded with a bearing plate covering
approximately one-third of the top surface. The results from these t e s t s ,
shown i n Figure 30, w i l l be compared to the predicted results derived from
the f i n i t e element model using material properties obtained from Specimens 1
and 3.
- 19 -
3.4 N o n l i n e a r F i n i t e Element Model
The f i n i t e element used i n t h e n o n l i n e a r a n a l y s i s i s e s s e n t i a l l y t h e
same as the one used i n the l i n e a r a n a l y s i s . However, t h e system o f elements
i s m o d i f i e d t o model the n o n l i n e a r o r t h o t r o p i c behaviour by u s i n g t h e
t e c h n i q u e d e s c r i b e d i n the f o l l o w i n g :
1) The s t r e s s - s t r a i n curves f o r Ej , E^ and G are stored i n the
computer.
2) The i n i t i a l s t i f f n e s s matrix Kj i s b u i l t u s i n g the e l a s t i c values
for E^, E^ ^ and G.
3) The l o a d P i s a p p l i e d i n increments, the f i r s t being P i .
4) The e l a s t i c d e f l e c t i o n i s c a l c u l a t e d from t h e e q u a t i o n KÂ^ = P^.
5) The s o l u t i o n f o r t h e i n c r e m e n t a l d e f l e c t i o n i n s u c c e e d i n g l o a d
increments i s o b t a i n e d by i t e r a t i o n as i l l u s t r a t e d i n F i g u r e 31.
The stored values of E., E„„ and G found i n the l a s t i t e r a t i o n

1 11
of t h e immediately p r e c e d i n g l o a d increment P^ ^ a r e used t o b u i l d
the s t i f f n e s s matrix K „ f o r the f i r s t i t e r a t i o n o f the l o a d

n1
increment P .
n
6) The i n i t i a l d e f l e c t i o n f o r t h i s l o a d increment i s calculated from
K A = P .
n1 n1 n
7) The program uses t h e average d e f l e c t i o n caused by t h e l o a d increment
to c a l c u l a t e the average s t r a i n i n each element. The average
d e f l e c t i o n i n an i t e r a t i o n i s t h e sum o f t h e d e f l e c t i o n s o f the
p r e v i o u s l o a d increments plus one-half the d e f l e c t i o n of t h i s
iteration.
8) The program uses t h e s e s t r a i n s t o s e l e c t t h e a p p r o p r i a t e v a l u e s o f
E
i' E
11 a n d G f r o m t l i e s t o r e d
curves o f s t r e s s versus strain.
9) These v a l u e s a r e compared w i t h those used when t h e s t i f f n e s s matrix
K i n was b u i l t . I f changes i n t h e v a l u e s a r e observed, t h e program

- 20 -
uses the new values to rebuild the s t i f f n e s s matrix and recalculate
K „ A = p .
n2 n2 n
10) The program returns to c a l c u l a t i n g the s t r a i n s , selecting values of
E^, E^ and G and comparing them to those used when the s t i f f -
ness matrix was b u i l t (steps 7, 8 and 9).
The calculations for the i n d i v i d u a l load increment are completed
when no changes are found i n the values f o r E^, E^ and G. The load i s
increased u n t i l either the required t o t a l load i s reached or deflections have
exceeded a predetermined value. Figure 32 shows the flow chart of the
program.
3.5 Variation of Material Properties
Before comparing the f i n i t e element predictions with the t e s t r e s u l t s ,
an examination w i l l be made as to how sensitive the predictions are to
variations i n the material properties.
The s o l i d l i n e shown i n Figure 33 shows the predicted stress versus
s t r a i n curve when the material properties used i n the f i n i t e element analysis
are the "average" from sample D (Figure 27) together with those selected as
representative values shown i n Figure 24. The dashed l i n e i n Figure 33 shows
the f i n i t e element prediction when the value f o r T i s doubled (1.26 k s i to

u
2.52 ksi) and the dotted l i n e shows the prediction when i s halfed (1.26
k s i to 0.63 k s i ) . The three predictions d i f f e r i n stress by less than 12%
for strains less than 0.05 i n / i n . S i m i l a r l y , f i n i t e element runs i n which
E^, G or i i ^ ^ were increased by 25% above the standard values showed that
i n none of these cases was the difference i n the predicted stress changed by
more than 3% f o r strains less than 0.05 i n / i n . The y i e l d stress p a r a l l e l to
grain was not varied since the elements were not near the y i e l d stress f o r
t h i s property. The ultimate shear stress T u was examined more thoroughly

- 21 -
than the o t h e r p r o p e r t i e s because i t was surmised t h a t t h i s p r o p e r t y would
have more e f f e c t than the other p r o p e r t i e s on the response.
It i s thus concluded t h a t the p r e d i c t e d response i s i n s e n s i t i v e t o
changes i n the s e l e c t e d m a t e r i a l p r o p e r t i e s f o r versus e

1 1 / T
versus
Y and ^ j ^ ^ * It i s therefore acceptable t o use the selected "standard"
values shown i n F i g u r e 24 f o r comparison of the p r e d i c t e d v a l u e s from the
finite element a n a l y s i s and the t e s t values.
3.6 Comparison of T e s t R e s u l t s w i t h F i n i t e Element P r e d i c t i o n s
The finite element model was now used t o p r e d i c t the s t r e s s - s t r a i n c u r v e
for the t e s t c o n f i g u r a t i o n used f o r Specimen 2 of each sample (C, D, E and F)
The i n p u t data f o r the f i n i t e element a n a l y s i s were the "average" s t r e s s
s t r a i n curve versus shown i n F i g u r e s 26 t o 29 ( f o r samples C, D, E
and F, r e s p e c t i v e l y ) , t o g e t h e r w i t h the s e l e c t e d m a t e r i a l p r o p e r t i e s shown i n
Figure 24 for a versus £ and T versus Y•
F i g u r e 34 d e p i c t s the comparison of the t e s t i n g o f Specimen C2 and the
corresponding f i n i t e element run. The graph shows t h a t the f i n i t e element
run p r e d i c t s the t e s t w i t h l i t t l e d i f f e r e n c e up t o 0.5 k s i and a maximum
d i f f e r e n c e of 10% above 0.5 ksi.
The comparison f o r Specimen D2 i s shown i n F i g u r e 35. For t h i s speci-
men, the curve from the f i n i t e element p r e d i c t i o n i s e s s e n t i a l l y the same as
the t e s t t o 0.8 ksi. Above 0.8 k s i the t e s t specimen has up t o 15% more
strength.
The comparison f o r Specimen E2 i n Figure 36 shows t h a t the f i n i t e e l e -
ment run c l o s e l y p r e d i c t s the t e s t i n g t o 0.95 ksi. Above 0.95 k s i the t e s t
specimen has up t o 12% more strength.
Finally, Figure 37 shows the comparison f o r Specimen F2. The finite
element p r e d i c t i o n and the t e s t f o r t h i s specimen are s i m i l a r up t o 0.5 ksi.

- 22 -
Above 0.5 k s i t h e d i f f e r e n c e i s up t o 40% and t h e f i n i t e element r u n i s thus
a poor p r e d i c t o r o f the t e s t . I t may be t h a t t h e a versus curve f o r
Specimen F2 i s n o t w e l l approximated by t h e "average" o f t h e specimens (F1
and F3) with 100% o f t h e area loaded.
A l s o shown i n F i g u r e 37 i s a f i n i t e element r u n u s i n g t h e s t i f f e s t
estimate of versus i n F i g u r e 29. T h i s comparison has a maximum
d i f f e r e n c e o f 25%.
These comparisons, u s i n g t h e s t i f f e s t estimate of versus £^ f o r
Sample F and u s i n g t h e average f o r t h e o t h e r samples, show a maximum differ-
ence o f 25%. However, the d i f f e r e n c e i s seldom g r e a t e r than 10%. Hence t h i s
f i n i t e element system, w h i l e n o t p e r f e c t , i s n e v e r t h e l e s s c o n s i d e r e d a s u i t -
a b l e model f o r p r e d i c t i n g wood's n o n l i n e a r response t o compression perpen-
d i c u l a r t o g r a i n l o a d i n g and i n a l l cases give conservative p r e d i c t i o n s .
3.7 Results
S i n c e t h e a n a l y t i c a l model has been shown t o be a s u i t a b l e method o f
examining wood's response t o l o a d f o r compression p e r p e n d i c u l a r t o g r a i n , t h e
a n a l y s i s was extended t o examine t h e t h r e e p r e v i o u s l y d e s c r i b e d l o a d i n g con-
f i g u r a t i o n s using several d i f f e r e n t r a t i o s of £/D and D/L.
The m a t e r i a l p r o p e r t i e s from one o f t h e f o u r t e s t samples c o u l d have
been used f o r t h i s a n a l y s i s . However, t h e r e i s a l a r g e amount o f v a r i a t i o n
i n t h e p r o p e r t i e s o f t h e t e s t samples even though t h e f o u r samples a r e from
one s p e c i e s group. In an attempt t o have curves o f m a t e r i a l p r o p e r t i e s which
r e p r e s e n t a s p e c i e s o f softwood, t h e curves f o r t h e m a t e r i a l p r o p e r t i e s used
for t h i s examination were chosen i n c o n s u l t a t i o n with r e s e a r c h e r s a t
F o r i n t e k ' s Western F o r e s t Products Lab.
The curves a r e shown i n F i g u r e 38. The versus was o b t a i n e d
from t e s t i n g o f 10 specimens o f d r y Douglas f i r (moisture c o n t e n t o f 12%)

23 -
while a versus T
versus Y and Poisson's r a t i o s are estimates
for the material.
Figures 39 to 42 show curves of the applied stress P/(b£) versus the
strain A/D for various geometries of the c e n t r a l l y loaded type I configura-
tion. The graphs show that the load carrying capacity of a specimen i s
highly dependent on i t s geometry. As Z/V decreases the capacity increases
and also to a lesser extent as D/L decreases the capacity increases.
For each applied stress versus s t r a i n curve, the s t r a i n i s zero when the
applied stress i s zero. The curves are merely o f f s e t f o r the convenience of
showing d i f f e r e n t curves on the same graph.
The r e s u l t s for the end bearing type II configuration (no r o t a t i o n ) , are
shown i n Figures 43 to 46. The stress versus s t r a i n curves are shown f o r
various geometries. Again the response i s dependent on geometry.
The results for the end bearing type III configuration (free r o t a t i o n ) ,
are shown i n Figures 47 to 50. Again the stress versus s t r a i n curves are
presented for various geometries. For t h i s configuration, the response i s
not as dependent on geometry as the other two configurations.
3.8 Analysis of Applied Stresses and Geometry
The applied stress versus s t r a i n curves i n Figures 39 to 50 showed
differences i n capacities for d i f f e r e n t geometries. The curves also showed
that the applied stress continues to increase beyond the onset of y i e l d i n g .
Since no d i s t i n c t f a i l u r e i s evident, a l i m i t i n g or ultimate condition must
be defined a r b i t r a r i l y to present these differences i n capacities i n a con-
venient fashion. The proportional l i m i t could be used but t h i s condition
disregards the increase i n load capacity beyond the e l a s t i c range which can
be s i g n i f i c a n t .
- 24 -
For e n g i n e e r i n g purposes, the s t r e s s a t a s t r a i n o f f s e t of 0.002 i n / i n
as shown i n F i g u r e 51 i s useful for defining a l i m i t i n g condition for the
f o l l o w i n g reasons:
1) The o f f s e t method allows an i n c r e a s e i n s t r e s s beyond the onset of
yielding.
2) There i s s t i l l ample r e s e r v e bearing stress capacity available, i . e .
the s t r e s s can i n c r e a s e beyond the s t r e s s determined by the o f f s e t
method without e x c e s s i v e damage.
3) The a p p l i e d s t r e s s v e r s u s s t r a i n curves show t h a t j u s t above the
o n s e t of y i e l d i n g the a p p l i e d s t r e s s i n c r e a s e s significantly for
small increases in strain. Above t h i s r e g i o n t h e r e i s a section of
the curves where an i n c r e a s e of a p p l i e d s t r e s s produces a l a r g e
strain. A 0.1% o f f s e t p r e d i c t s a s t r e s s i n the r e g i o n where a small
change i n s t r a i n produces a l a r g e change i n s t r e s s . A 0.4% offset,
on the other hand, p r e d i c t s a s t r e s s at a s t r a i n where a small
change i n s t r e s s produces a l a r g e change i n s t r a i n . Using a value
between the two c o n d i t i o n s , i . e . a 0.2% o f f s e t , i s judged t o be
practical.
4) The deformations are s m a l l and known. The linear deflection A is
Pu E
l
equal to — D where Pu/(b£) i s the a p p l i e d s t r e s s and E
bArE, E a
1 a
i s the l i n e a r slope of the a p p l i e d s t r e s s v e r s u s s t r a i n curve. The
term E / E was examined i n Chapter 2. The nonlinear deflection
i s equal t o 0.002D. Therefore, the t o t a l d e f l e c t i o n i s :
A u
- (bfi: r +
°- 002)D 3
- 1
1 a
The applied stresses Pu/(b£) obtained by the 0.2% o f f s e t method f o r
the v a r i o u s geometries o f the type I l o a d c o n f i g u r a t i o n are p l o t t e d against
SL/D and D/L i n F i g u r e 52. The graph shows the d i f f e r e n c e s i n c a p a c i t y for

- 25 -
the v a r i o u s geometries.
A m a t e r i a l term a w i l l now be d e f i n e d as t h e s t r e s s a t 0.002 in/in

o
o f f s e t when 100% o f t h e m a t e r i a l i s l o a d e d as shown i n F i g u r e 53. This will
be considered a basic material property f o r compression p e r p e n d i c u l a r t o
g r a i n and i s d i f f e r e n t from the ASTM d e f i n i t i o n . This property c o u l d be
s p e c i e s dependent and w i l l be the b a s i s f o r e s t a b l i s h i n g the s t r e n g t h i n
compression p e r p e n d i c u l a r to grain.
Having d e f i n e d i t i s now p o s s i b l e t o normalize the i n f o r m a t i o n
provided i n F i g u r e 52 by d i v i d i n g Pu/(b£) by O .
q T h i s g i v e s a convenient
way o f showing the i n c r e a s e i n c a p a c i t y when l e s s than 100% o f the area i s
loaded. The r e s u l t o f t h i s i s shown i n F i g u r e 54 where i t can be observed
t h a t t h e c a r r y i n g c a p a c i t y f o r s m a l l areas loaded can be more than double
a
o.
F i g u r e 55 shows t h e i n c r e a s e i n c a p a c i t y as a f u n c t i o n o f geometry f o r
the end b e a r i n g c o n f i g u r a t i o n type I I (no r o t a t i o n ) . The graph shows t h a t
c a p a c i t y f o r Z/D equal t o 0.25 and D/L l e s s than 1.0 can be up t o 80%
g r e a t e r than the b a s i c c a p a c i t y o^.
F i n a l l y , F i g u r e 56 shows t h e i n c r e a s e i n c a p a c i t y f o r t h e end b e a r i n g
c o n f i g u r a t i o n type I I I ( f r e e r o t a t i o n ) . F o r t h i s case the i n c r e a s e i n capa-
c i t y as Z/T> decreases i s not as s i g n i f i c a n t as i n t h e o t h e r configurations.
However, t h e c a p a c i t y f o r Z/D equal t o 0.25 and D/L l e s s than 1.0 i s
still 40% more than t h e b a s i c c a p a c i t y 0" .

q
3.9 Internal Stress Analysis
The previous s e c t i o n showed t h a t t h e s t r e n g t h u s i n g t h e 0.2% o f f s e t
c r i t e r i o n i s h i g h l y dependent on the geometry o f t h e specimen.
T h i s s e c t i o n w i l l examine the i n t e r n a l s t r e s s e s t o g a i n an u n d e r s t a n d i n g
of why t h e c a p a c i t y i s so dependent on geometry. F i g u r e s 57 t o 59 show t h e

- 26 -
i n t e r n a l s t r e s s e s i n t h r e e t y p i c a l specimens of d i f f e r e n t geometries. The
applied stress P/(b£) i n each specimen i s equal t o the s t r e s s at the 0.2%
offset. The shear s t r e s s d i s t r i b u t i o n a l o n g the v e r t i c a l c u t s p o s i t i o n e d at
the edges o f the b e a r i n g p l a t e are shown. The normal s t r e s s e s are also
i n d i c a t e d f o r a h o r i z o n t a l cut a t a depth o f 0.885D (the middle o f the bottom
row of e l e m e n t s ) . A specimen with 100% of i t s area loaded w i l l , of course,
have a u n i f o r m s t r e s s d i s t r i b u t i o n . The specimens i n F i g u r e s 57 t o 59 were
chosen t o have a l a r g e v a r i a t i o n i n t h e i r stress distributions.
The average shear s t r e s s i n the top 0.025D of m a t e r i a l i s g r e a t e r than
the u l t i m a t e shear s t r e s s used i n the finite element program. This i s
p o s s i b l e because the f i n i t e element method s o l v e s f o r an average shear s t r e s s
in a region. The shear s t r e s s e s shown were found by summing the normal
f o r c e s i n a h o r i z o n t a l cut through the row o f elements under the bearing
p l a t e and then u s i n g s t a t i c s t o s o l v e f o r the shear s t r e s s e s . T h i s shows an
e r r o r i n the model, but the e r r o r w i l l be shown t o be s m a l l by the following
rational. While the shear s t r e s s e s are high they are not u n a c c e p t a b l y high
s i n c e the volume of the m a t e r i a l s u b j e c t t o h i g h s t r e s s e s i s very small. For
instance, i f the specimen of F i g u r e 57 was 10" deep and 3" wide (D=10",
b=3"), the volume of m a t e r i a l t h a t has a shear s t r e s s l a r g e r than 1.0 ksi is
l e s s than two cubic inches. F o s c h i and B a r r e t t ^ have shown t h a t the ultimate
shear s t r e s s i s dependent on the volume of the m a t e r i a l t h a t i s s t r e s s e d .
Their research shows a volume of one cubic i n c h of Douglas f i r has an average
ultimate shear s t r e s s of 2500 p s i .
However, even i f some m a t e r i a l y i e l d s i n shear, i t would c r e a t e little
change i n the s t r e s s at the 0.2% o f f s e t f o r the f o l l o w i n g reasons:
1) Only a s m a l l p o r t i o n of m a t e r i a l i s h i g h l y s t r e s s e d i n shear.
2) The yielded material could still c a r r y shear due to f r i c t i o n arising
from the h i g h normal s t r e s s e s i n the same r e g i o n .

The high shear s t r e s s e s c l o s e t o t h e b e a r i n g p l a t e show t h a t t h e e f f e c t
of t h e l o a d i s r a p i d l y b e i n g d i s t r i b u t e d through the specimen i n t h i s region.
Examining a freebody diagram o f t h i s r e g i o n as shown i n F i g u r e 60 i s u s e f u l
t o g a i n u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f the mechanics o f compression p e r p e n d i c u l a r to grain
loading. Only v e r t i c a l f o r c e s have been shown on t h e freebody diagram.
Examining the freebody shows t h a t d i r e c t l y under the b e a r i n g plate (the t o p
surface) t h e t o t a l shear f o r c e i s zero and t h a t t h e a p p l i e d l o a d i s o n l y
r e s i s t e d by s t r e s s e s p e r p e n d i c u l a r to grain. At any depth below the t o p
surface, t h e a p p l i e d l o a d i s r e s i s t e d by b o t h shear and normal s t r e s s e s . The
graph i n F i g u r e 60 shows the pecentage o f the a p p l i e d l o a d which i s r e s i s t e d
by shear a t a depth o f 0.075D down from t h e b e a r i n g p l a t e . The percentage
c a r r i e d by shear decreases as Z/D i s increased. For c o n s t a n t D and L
the percentage c a r r i e d by shear i s i n c r e a s e d as t h e l e n g t h o f t h e b e a r i n g
p l a t e i s reduced.
An a d d i t i o n a l contribution t o the i n c r e a s i n g capacity f o r decreasing
Z/D r a t i o s can be i l l u s t r a t e d by the f o l l o w i n g . As Z/D decreases t h e
perpendicular t o g r a i n s t r e s s d i s t r i b u t i o n under t h e b e a r i n g p l a t e becomes
l e s s uniform. The h i g h e r s t r e s s e s are c o n c e n t r a t e d near t h e edges o f t h e
bearing p l a t e , as shown by the s t r e s s c o n t o u r s o f two specimens i n F i g u r e 61.
The c o n t o u r s a r e l i n e s o f equal v a l u e s o f a c t u a l p e r p e n d i c u l a r to grain
s t r e s s e s d i v i d e d by t h e a p p l i e d s t r e s s . As shown i n F i g u r e 38 t h e y i e l d
stress perpendicular t o g r a i n i s 450 p s i . T h e r e f o r e any m a t e r i a l that i s
s t r e s s e d h i g h e r than 450 p s i has y i e l d e d . F o r t h e case Z/D = 1.0, Pu/(b&)
= 750 p s i and a l l o f t h e m a t e r i a l above the contour l i n e 450/750 = 0 . 6 has
yielded. F o r t h e case Z/D = 0.25, Pu/(b&) = 1050 p s i and o n l y material
above the contour l i n e 0.4 has y i e l d e d . The graphs show t h a t a smaller
p e r c e n t a g e o f t h e wood under t h e b e a r i n g p l a t e has y i e l d e d f o r t h e case w i t h
Z/D = 0.25 than the case with Z/D = 1.0.

- 28 -
U s i n g t h e 0.2% o f f s e t c r i t e r i a , t h e t o t a l n o n l i n e a r d e f l e c t i o n i s equal
t o 0.002D. E s s e n t i a l l y , o n l y m a t e r i a l t h a t has y i e l d e d c o n t r i b u t e s t o t h e
nonlinear deflection. Since both specimens have t h e same depth, t h e t o t a l
nonlinear d e f l e c t i o n i s the same f o r both c a s e s . Consequently, t h e wood t h a t
has y i e l d e d has a l a r g e r s t r a i n f o r t h e case w i t h i/D = 0.25 than t h e case
with &/D = 1.0. Since the s t r e s s continues t o i n c r e a s e as t h e s t r a i n
i n c r e a s e s , t h e wood near t h e b e a r i n g p l a t e has a h i g h e r l e v e l of stress
perpendicular t o g r a i n f o r £/D = 0.25, r e s i s t i n g the a p p l i e d s t r e s s .
Therefore, t h i s e f f e c t a l s o i n c r e a s e s t h e c a r r y i n g c a p a c i t y as £/D
decreases.
Any wood t h a t has r e s i s t a n c e t o shear and a s t r e s s - s t r a i n curve perpen-
d i c u l a r t o g r a i n such t h a t t h e s t r e s s i n c r e a s e s f o r s t r a i n s i n the i n e l a s t i c
range w i l l show a s i m i l a r behaviour o f t h e dependence o f c a p a c i t y on
geometry. To i l l u s t r a t e t h i s , T a b l e V p r e s e n t s a comparison o f t h e term
Pu/(b£o" ) from t h e f i n i t e element a n a l y s i s f o r t h e t e s t samples and v a l u e s

o
from F i g u r e 54. The t a b l e shows a maximum d i f f e r e n c e o f 10% even though t h e
values f o r t h e m a t e r i a l p r o p e r t i e s are v e r y different. I t can be concluded
from t h i s t h a t t h e c a p a c i t y Pu/(b£a ) i s a f u n c t i o n o f geometry and i s o n l y

o
weakly dependent on the m a t e r i a l p r o p e r t i e s . The m a t e r i a l properties
r e f e r r e d t o a r e t h e curves o f versus e, f o r samples C, D, E and F as
shown i n F i g u r e s 26-29, r e s p e c t i v e l y and t h e c u r v e s f o r a versus
and T versus T f o r a l l t h e t e s t samples as shown i n F i g u r e 24. The
curves f o r t h e m a t e r i a l p r o p e r t i e s used t o develop F i g u r e 54 a r e s t a t e d i n
F i g u r e 38.
While t h i s cannot be c o n s i d e r e d complete p r o o f , i t shows t h a t i t i s
p o s s i b l e t o develop a s e t o f curves o f t h e a p p l i e d s t r e s s a t 0.2% o f f s e t
d i v i d e d by a as a f u n c t i o n o f geometry which w i l l r e p r e s e n t most s o f t -
woods. The term a,Q which i s t h e s t r e s s o b t a i n e d by t h e 0.2% o f f s e t when

- 29 -
100% o f t h e m a t e r i a l i s loaded might however be d i f f e r e n t f o r each s p e c i e s o f
wood.
In summary, the a n a l y s i s u s i n g t h e 0.2% o f f s e t shows t h e c a p a c i t y o f
specimens s u b j e c t e d t o compression p e r p e n d i c u l a r t o g r a i n loads i s h i g h l y
dependent on t h e i r geometry and i n c r e a s e s as i/D decreases but i s o n l y
weakly dependent on the m a t e r i a l p r o p e r t i e s .

- 30 -
CHAPTER 4
PROPOSED DESIGN METHOD
4.1 Introduction
A d e s i g n method a p p l i c a b l e t o the v a r i o u s geometries of b e a r i n g condi-
t i o n s o c c u r r i n g i n p r a c t i c e i s presented i n t h i s chapter. The proposed
d e s i g n method i s easy t o use d e s p i t e the complex r e l a t i o n s h i p between the
depth of beam, l e n g t h of b e a r i n g p l a t e , e t c . , d i s c u s s e d p r e v i o u s l y . Also,
t h e method i n c l u d e s p r o v i s i o n s f o r e s t i m a t i n g the d e f l e c t i o n of a b e a r i n g
plate.
The p r e s e n t d e s i g n method as o u t l i n e d i n CSA 086 b

specifies a basic
a l l o w a b l e s t r e s s which then governs the s i z e of the b e a r i n g area; t h a t i s ,
t h e b e a r i n g l o a d d i v i d e d by the a l l o w a b l e s t r e s s g i v e s the r e q u i r e d s i z e o f
plate. T h i s b a s i c s t r e s s can be i n c r e a s e d as s t a t e d i n c l a u s e 3.3.2.5 -
Length of Bearing:
"When l e n g t h s of b e a r i n g or diameters of washers are l e s s than
6 i n c h e s , and no p a r t of the b e a r i n g area i s c l o s e r t o the end
o f the member than 3 i n c h e s , the a l l o w a b l e b e a r i n g s t r e s s may be
m u l t i p l i e d by the a p p r o p r i a t e m o d i f i c a t i o n f a c t o r as s e t f o r t h i n
T a b l e 4 p r o v i d e d such b e a r i n g areas do not occur i n p o s i t i o n s of
high f l e x u r a l stress".
T a b l e 4 o f the above c l a u s e i s shown on the f o l l o w i n g page. The
requirements t h a t no p a r t of the b e a r i n g p l a t e be c l o s e r t o the end of a
member than 3 i n c h e s e l i m i n a t e s most end s u p p o r t c o n d i t i o n s f o r beams from
h a v i n g the advantage of i n c r e a s e d s t r e s s e s . While t h i s p r e s e n t design method
met
sets the requirements o f b e i n g easy t o use, i t does not a c c u r a t e l y r e f l e c t
- 31 -
the b e h a v i o u r of compression p e r p e n d i c u l a r to grain loading.
TABLE 4
(of CSA 086 C l a u s e 3.3.2.5)
Modification Factors f o r V a r i o u s Lengths of Bearing
Length of B e a r i n g Modification
(inches) Factor
1/2 1.75
1 1.38
1 1/2 1.25
2 1.19
3 1.13
4 1.10
6 or more 1.00
4.2 Bearing Conditions i n Practice
Each of the t h r e e b e a r i n g configurations (type I, type I I and type III)
examined i n t h i s t h e s i s i s an approximate model of a b e a r i n g condition
occurring i n practice. The boundary c o n d i t i o n s f o r the model are not
i d e n t i c a l t o those of beams o c c u r r i n g in practice. In the models i t i s
assumed t h a t the side opposite the b e a r i n g p l a t e i s r i g i d , whereas i n the
p r a c t i c a l cases the o p p o s i t e s i d e i s u s u a l l y loaded and not restrained
a g a i n s t movement. The purpose o f t h i s s e c t i o n i s t o show the d i f f e r e n c e i s
inconsequential.
The a n a l y s i s of s e c t i o n 3.9 shows b e a r i n g s t r e s s c a p a c i t y t o be a local
e f f e c t , i . e . the l o a d i s r a p i d l y b e i n g d i s t r i b u t e d t o the wood from the
b e a r i n g p l a t e i n the r e g i o n c l o s e t o the b e a r i n g p l a t e as shown i n F i g u r e 61.
Because the b e a r i n g c a p a c i t y i s a l o c a l e f f e c t , the f o r c e d e f i n e d by the 0.2%
o f f s e t would not change s i g n i f i c a n t l y i f the boundary c o n d i t i o n s were
altered. Figure 62 p r e s e n t s a comparison of Pu/(b£a ) Q f o r the type I
configuration and a model with a f r e e boundary on the side opposite the bear-
- 32 -
ing plate. The t a b l e i n F i g u r e 62 g i v e s t h e a p p l i e d s t r e s s as d e f i n e d by t h e
0.2% o f f s e t c r i t e r i a f o r f o u r geometries o f each o f the two c o n f i g u r a t i o n s .
The t a b l e shows a maximum d i f f e r e n c e o f 4% i n Pu/(b£a ) f o r t h e same

o
geometries o f each c o n f i g u r a t i o n .
The graph i n F i g u r e 62 shows s t r e s s v e r s u s s t r a i n diagrams o f two s p e c i -
mens. The two specimens have the same geometry but d i f f e r e n t boundary condi-
tions.
The d i f f e r e n c e i n t h e two curves i s e s s e n t i a l l y o n l y t h e d e f l e c t i o n o f
the beam. The beam d e f l e c t i o n formula f o r a f i x e d - f i x e d r e c t a n g u l a r wood
beam w i t h a p o i n t l o a d a t t h e m i d p o i n t i s :
PL 3
. 3PL
A =
•j 10bDG
16E ^bD^
By r e a r r a n g i n g the terms i t i s found:
— = — — (-1- f£) 3
+ -J- lk))
D hi. D 16E '•D'' 10G K

D
JJ
For the curve shown i n F i g u r e 62, SL/D i s equal t o 0.5 and D/L i s equal
t o 0.1. S u b s t i t u t i n g these v a l u e s i n t o the formula y i e l d s :

A P
D - 0
' 0 3 2 4
b T
When P/(b£) = 0.6 k s i , A/D = 0.0194. F i g u r e 62 shows t h i s v a l u e plotted
t o i n d i c a t e t h a t the d i f f e r e n c e i n the two cases r e a l l y i s the beam d e f l e c -
tion. Since t h e d i f f e r e n c e i n t h e two curves i s o n l y the beam d e f l e c t i o n , i t
i s acceptable i n t h i s case t o use the models with f i x e d lower boundaries t o
study b e a r i n g conditions occurring i n practice.
The type I c e n t e r l i n e loaded c o n f i g u r a t i o n can be c o n s i d e r e d an approx-
imate model o f t h e b e a r i n g c o n d i t i o n s o f a continuous beam over a support.
The model does not i n c l u d e the h i g h f l e x u r a l s t r e s s e s t h a t are g e n e r a l l y
present i n a continuous beam over a support. There may be an i n t e r a c t i o n
between the b e a r i n g s t r e s s e s and the h i g h flexural s t r e s s which i s n o t

- 33 - •
i n c l u d e d i n t h e model. T h i s c o n d i t i o n s w i l l be f u r t h e r d i s c u s s e d i n section
4.4d.
The end b e a r i n g type I I c o n f i g u r a t i o n (no r o t a t i o n ) i s a model o f t h e
bearing c o n d i t i o n s a t t h e end o f a simple beam. T y p i c a l l y , the bearing plate
i s r e s t r a i n e d a g a i n s t r o t a t i o n by t h e b e n d i n g r e s i s t a n c e o f a column o r by
t o r s i o n a l r e s i s t a n c e of a supporting beam. The d e s i g n e r must ensure t h a t t h e
s u p p o r t can w i t h s t a n d the e c c e n t r i c l o a d w i t h l e s s r o t a t i o n than t h e end o f
the beam. F i g u r e 63 shows the p o s i t i o n o f the l o a d r e l a t i v e t o t h e b e a r i n g
p l a t e f o r t h e type I I c o n d i t i o n t o occur as a f u n c t i o n o f Z/D.
The end b e a r i n g type I I I c o n f i g u r a t i o n ( f r e e r o t a t i o n ) i s a model o f a
b e a r i n g p l a t e a t t h e end o f a beam where t h e support cannot p r o v i d e the o f f -
center l o a d t o the b e a r i n g p l a t e . T h i s i s n o t a common c o n d i t i o n but c o u l d
occur o c c a s i o n a l l y .
4.3 Design C o n s i d e r a t i o n s f o r Geometry E f f e c t s
This s e c t i o n w i l l present the r a t i o n a l f o r presenting t h e design method
as two systems. System A w i l l i n c l u d e the case when 100% o f t h e area i s
loaded and t h e end b e a r i n g type I I I ( f r e e r o t a t i o n ) c o n f i g u r a t i o n . System B
will i n c l u d e t h e type I c e n t e r l i n e loaded c o n f i g u r a t i o n and t h e end b e a r i n g
type I I c o n f i g u r a t i o n .
The c a p a c i t y o f t h e case with 100% o f t h e area loaded, a r a r e condition
i n p r a c t i c e , i s not dependent on geometry. The s t r e n g t h i s equal t o a ,
which i s t h e s t r e s s found by the 0.2% o f f s e t f o r t h i s c o n d i t i o n . The d e s i g n
method f o r t h i s c o n d i t i o n w i l l be r e f e r r e d t o as system A.
Figure 56 i n d i c a t e s t h a t t h e c a p a c i t y o f t h e type I I I c o n f i g u r a t i o n
( f r e e r o t a t i o n ) i s up t o 40% g r e a t e r than O Q when £/D i s greater than
0.25. While t h e 40% i n c r e a s e i n s t r e n g t h i s s u b s t a n t i a l i t i s judged t o be
unimportant because o f t h e r a r i t y o f t h i s f r e e r o t a t i o n c o n d i t i o n i n
- 34 -
practice. The d e s i g n method f o r t h i s c o n f i g u r a t i o n w i l l t h e r e f o r e be t h e
same as the case f o r 100% o f the area loaded, t h a t i s , system A.
The c a p a c i t y of the type I c e n t e r l i n e l o a d e d c o n f i g u r a t i o n when t h e
geometric terms are r e d e f i n e d i n F i g u r e 64 i s a t most 5% g r e a t e r than t h e
c a p a c i t y o f the end b e a r i n g type I I c o n f i g u r a t i o n (no r o t a t i o n ) . F i g u r e 65
shows t h i s comparison. Since the c a p a c i t i e s are s i m i l a r , i t i s p r a c t i c a l t o
develop one d e s i g n method f o r the b e a r i n g c o n d i t i o n s these c o n f i g u r a t i o n s
model. I t i s thus c o n s e r v a t i v e t o base the d e s i g n method, r e f e r r e d t o as
system B, on t h e end b e a r i n g type I I c o n f i g u r a t i o n .
The proposed system B d e s i g n method w i l l be based on the curves p r e -
s e n t e d i n F i g u r e 55. F i g u r e 55 c o u l d , i t s e l f , be used f o r t h e d e s i g n
method. However, s i n c e the b e a r i n g p l a t e l e n g t h I i s the r e q u i r e d
i n f o r m a t i o n and s i n c e t h i s l e n g t h o c c u r s i n both a x i s o f the graph, this
would r e s u l t i n a cumbersome t r i a l and e r r o r d e s i g n procedure.
A l e s s cumbersome d e s i g n method can be o b t a i n e d by m u l t i p l y i n g t h e term
Vu/ibia^) o f F i g u r e 55 by £/D which y i e l d s Pu/fbDcM. T h i s term i s
plotted against i/D i n F i g u r e 66. The terms Pu, b and D are known
from t h e d e s i g n c o n d i t i o n s and t h e term 0"q i s the m a t e r i a l property.
4.4 D e t a i l s o f t h e Proposed Design Method
4.4a Design f o r Stress
For system A, when 100% o f the a r e a i s loaded o r the b e a r i n g p l a t e
cannot be r e s t r a i n e d a g a i n s t r o t a t i o n (by l o a d i n g the b e a r i n g p l a t e o f f
c e n t e r ) , t h e b e a r i n g p l a t e s i z e i s found by t h e e q u a t i o n I = Pu/(ba ).Q
System B, f o r the type I c e n t e r l i n e l o a d e d and the end b e a r i n g type I I
configuration (no r o t a t i o n ) c o u l d use F i g u r e 66 as t h e d e s i g n curve.
However, the graph can be s i m p l i f i e d by two p r a c t i c a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n s :

- 35 -
1) S i n c e beam l e n g t h s are g e n e r a l l y many times t h e i r depths, s p e c i f y i n g
a maximum v a l u e o f D/L is practical. A r b i t r a r i l y a maximum v a l u e
o f 0.3 was chosen, i . e . D/L < 0.3.
2) I t i s u n l i k e l y t h a t the l e n g t h of a b e a r i n g p l a t e would be l a r g e r
t h a n the beam depth. Therefore, i t i s p r a c t i c a l t o d i s r e g a r d the
l e s s than 35% i n c r e a s e i n c a p a c i t y when £/D i s g r e a t e r than 1.0 as
shown i n F i g u r e 55.
D i s r e g a r d i n g the s m a l l i n c r e a s e i n c a p a c i t y between D/L equal to 0.0
and D/L equal t o 0.3, o n l y one curve i s necessary f o r the system B design
as shown i n F i g u r e 67. T h i s i s from F i g u r e 66 f o r D/L = 0.3 and for
£/D < 1.0. F i g u r e 68 d e f i n e s the geometric terms f o r u s i n g t h i s design
curve. T h i s suggested d e s i g n curve c o n t a i n s most of the significant
i n c r e a s e s i n the c a p a c i t i e s t h a t are shown i n F i g u r e 55.
I t s h o u l d be noted t h a t system A can a l s o be shown i n F i g u r e 67 as the
s t r a i g h t l i n e where Pu/(bDo ) = £/D or I = Pu/(ba ). With both systems on

o o
one graph i t i s obvious t h a t a s h o r t e r % (greater stress) i s permissible
f o r system B over system A f o r any given Pu/fbDO^).

Curve f i t t i n g with a p a r a b o l a shows a reasonable approximation of the
system B d e s i g n curve as being:
= O^Pu |u_
ba bDa
o o
In summary, the proposed d e s i g n method s t a t e s :
1) For system A, the b e a r i n g p l a t e l e n g t h i s g i v e n by % = Pu/(bcM .
2) For system B, use the d e s i g n curve i n F i g u r e 67. To f i n d the bearing
p l a t e length, c a l c u l a t e the value f o r Pu/(bD0" ) and Q select £/D
from the design curve. The bearing plate length £ is equal to
Dx£/D. A l t e r n a t i v e l y , use equation 4.1 t o c a l c u l a t e the bearing
plate length £.
- 36 -
4.4b E s t i m a t e o f the D e f l e c t i o n
An approximation of the d e f l e c t i o n Au o f the b e a r i n g p l a t e with
r e s p e c t t o the o t h e r s i d e of the beam a t the l o a d Pu can be c a l c u l a t e d from
equation 3.1:
A u
= CbS: r x +
°- 002)d 4,2
1 a
when Au = deflection
Pu = applied stress
bl
= modulus of e l a s t i c i t y perpendicular to grain
E
l
E /E = l i n e a r response term examined i n c h a p t e r 2 (see F i g u r e 10
J- 3L
or 17)
D = depth o f beam
The deflection Au i s the d e f l e c t i o n w i t h r e s p e c t t o the o t h e r s i d e of
the b e a r i n g p l a t e f o r a specimen r e s t i n g on a r i g i d base.
Beams g e n e r a l l y have a u n i f o r m l i n e l o a d on the s i d e o p p o s i t e the b e a r i n g
p l a t e , not a r i g i d base as assumed i n the f o r m u l a s . The rigid base
c o n c e n t r a t e s the s t r e s s p e r p e n d i c u l a r t o g r a i n between the b e a r i n g p l a t e and
the r i g i d boundary, so the d e f l e c t i o n estimate t h e r e f o r e w i l l be somewhat
h i g h e r than the a c t u a l d e f l e c t i o n . F i g u r e 69 shows the d i f f e r e n c e i n the
e s t i m a t e d d e f l e c t i o n and the c a l c u l a t e d d e f l e c t i o n f o r s e v e r a l f i n i t e element
runs. The graph shows the d i f f e r e n c e i s 25% a t l/D = 0.5 and decreases
f u r t h e r as l/D decreases.
The term E /E can be found from F i g u r e 10 or from the formula:
4.3
E./E = 1/d + 0.44 D/l)
-L cl
for the type I c e n t e r l i n e loaded c o n f i g u r a t i o n . This i s different from
e q u a t i o n 2.4 p r e s e n t e d i n s e c t i o n 2.8 because o f the r e d e f i n i t i o n of the term
I f o r the d e s i g n method. For the end b e a r i n g type I I (no r o t a t i o n )
configuration E./E can be found from F i g u r e 17 or from e q u a t i o n 2.5.

E./E = 1/(1 + 0.36 D/Z) 4.5
X 9.
Both of the equations, 4.4 and 4.5, are acceptable approximations of the
response when Z/D i s less than 1.0 and D/L i s less than 0.3.
In summary, equation 4.3 provides a conservative estimate of the
deflection of a bearing with respect to the other side of the beam.
4.4c Design Philosophy
The curves and equations for the proposed design method were developed
using one set of material properties. The design curves and equations
dealing with geometry would change i f a d i f f e r e n t set of material properties
were used. However, t h i s change would be small because:
1) Section 2.5 shows that the l i n e a r response term E /E is
i n s e n s i t i v e to changes i n the values f o r the material properties.
2) Section 3.5 shows the applied stress P/(b£) versus s t r a i n A/D
curves to be insensitive to changes i n the values E^, G, TU and
3) Section 3.9 shows the value f o r the applied stress Pu/(b£), as
defined by the 0.2% o f f s e t , divided by the material term is
only weakly dependent on the other material properties.
The behavior of wood under compression perpendicular to grain loading
depends heavily on the material properties and E^ but these have been
included i n the design formulas presented herein. It must be remembered that
a. and E have to be evaluated using 100% of the area loaded. The ASTM
o 1
tests and values used now i n most codes are not applicable i n these formulas
and proposed code sections. Values of O q and E^ must be found by further
t e s t i n g and evaluated by code committees.

- 38 -
A method of making p r o v i s i o n f o r a f a c t o r of s a f e t y has not been
mentioned so f a r . The p r e s e n t d e s i g n p r o c e d u r e s use a working s t r e s s method
where the m a t e r i a l s t r e s s term i s d i v i d e d by a f a c t o r o f s a f e t y . This i s
used i n c o n j u n c t i o n with stated deterministic loads. However, t r e n d s in
design philosophy are t o use an u l t i m a t e s t r e n g t h procedure, r e f e r r e d t o as
limit states design, using load f a c t o r s a a p p l i e d t o the expected loads and
performance f a c t o r s <$> a p p l i e d t o the m a t e r i a l terms. The traditional factor
of s a f e t y i s i n c l u d e d p a r t i a l l y i n the l o a d f a c t o r s and p a r t i a l l y i n the
performance f a c t o r s . I t i s suggested than an u l t i m a t e s t r e n g t h design
procedure should be used i n c o n j u n c t i o n with the proposed d e s i g n method.
The loads t o be used i n c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h the proposed d e s i g n method are
the expected loads times the l o a d f a c t o r s .
S i m i l a r l y , the m a t e r i a l term should be O Q times a s u i t a b l e performance
factor <f>. U s u a l l y the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s t r e n g t h i n wood i s determined by the
5th p e r c e n t i l e . However, i n t h i s case t h i s may be o v e r l y conservative
because the s t r e n g t h i n compression p e r p e n d i c u l a r t o g r a i n can increase
beyond without sudden failure.
4.4d L i m i t a t i o n s of the Proposed Design Method
The models used t o develop the proposed d e s i g n method have a r i g i d base.
Because of t h i s , the models do not f u l l y i n c l u d e the f l e x u r a l s t r e s s e s which
occur i n a continuous beam over a support. F i n i t e element runs were used t o
examine the i n c r e a s e i n p a r a l l e l t o g r a i n s t r e s s e s over the s t r e s s e s from
o r d i n a r y beam t h e o r y o c c u r r i n g near b e a r i n g p l a t e s .
The i n c r e a s e i n s t r e s s caused by the s t r e s s c o n c e n t r a t i o n s near t h e
b e a r i n g p l a t e v a r y from compression t o t e n s i o n . The i n c r e a s e i n the
compression s t r e s s occurs i n a s m a l l r e g i o n of wood d i r e c t l y under the
bearing plate. T h i s c o u l d o n l y cause some l o c a l y i e l d i n g of the wood and i t

would have l i t t l e e f f e c t on the c a p a c i t y o f the beam.
The i n c r e a s e i n t e n s i o n can occur i n a continuous beam h a v i n g concen-
t r a t e d r e a c t i o n s a p p l i e d t o both the top and bottom s u r f a c e s and this could
be important s i n c e wood cannot y i e l d i n t e n s i o n . However, the volume of wood
t h a t has a high increase i n tension i s small. A volume of approximately
O.OUDb has an i n c r e a s e i n t e n s i o n g r e a t e r than the a p p l i e d s t r e s s Pu/(b£).
S i n c e the volume of m a t e r i a l t h a t i s h i g h l y s t r e s s e d i s s m a l l , i t i s accept-
able t o use the proposed design method even i n r e g i o n s of h i g h flexural
stresses.
The proposed d e s i g n method i s based on a n a l y s i s u s i n g a r i g i d p l a t e
l o a d i n g and i t may not be applicable for f l e x i b l e bearing conditions.
A p l a t e designed on e l a s t i c p r i n c i p l e s w i l l be checked t o see how rigid
it i s by comparing the d i f f e r e n c e i n the d e f l e c t i o n of the middle and the end
o f the p l a t e t o the average d e f l e c t i o n o f the p l a t e w i t h r e s p e c t t o the other
s i d e of the beam. The assumptions are:
1) The load i s applied uniformly across the width b.
2) The l o a d i s centered i n the length I.
3) The r e s i s t i n g s t r e s s e s are u n i f o r m and equal to Pu/(b£).
4) The maximum s t r e s s i n the b e a r i n g p l a t e o c c u r s at the extreme f i b r e s
and i s the y i e l d s t r e s s Oy for steel.
5) The modulus of e l a s t i c i t y f o r s t e e l Es i s equal t o 29,000 k s i .
The d e f l e c t i o n o f the end o f the b e a r i n g p l a t e w i t h r e s p e c t t o the
middle becomes:
A _ j_ Pu j _ r4b£oy>, 3/2
p 32 b£ E 3Pu '
s
The average d e f l e c t i o n o f the b e a r i n g p l a t e w i t h r e s p e c t t o the other
s i d e of the beam i s :
E
- 40 -
T a b l e VI shows a comparison o f and A. To be c o n s i d e r e d r i g i d , t h e
p l a t e f o r £/D = 1.0 must be t h i c k e r than t h e p l a t e t h a t i s r e q u i r e d by
design. However, f o r Z/D l e s s than 0.5, t h e p l a t e r e q u i r e d by d e s i g n i s
sufficiently rigid.
4.5 Design Examples
Design examples u s i n g t h e proposed d e s i g n method w i l l be compared t o t h e
present allowable stress design.
The d e s i g n curve o f F i g u r e 67 was developed u s i n g values of the m a t e r i a l
p r o p e r t i e s f o r Douglas f i r f o r which the a l l o w a b l e s t r e s s i s 460 p s i . This
a l l o w a b l e s t r e s s i s d e r i v e d from t h e ASTM t e s t method as d e s c r i b e d i n Chapter
1.
The m a t e r i a l p r o p e r t i e s used t o develop t h e proposed d e s i g n method show
a value f o r O q as b e i n g 465 p s i ( F i g u r e 5 3 ) . R e s t a t e d , t h i s i s t h e s t r e s s
o b t a i n e d by t h e 0.2% o f f s e t c r i t e r i a when 100% o f t h e area i s loaded. For
the purpose o f comparing the proposed d e s i g n method with the p r e s e n t design
method, a l o a d f a c t o r o f 1.5 and a performance f a c t o r o f 1.0 w i l l be used.

Using a equal t o 465 p s i may not, however, be t h e r e p r e s e n t a t i v e
o
v a l u e f o r Douglas f i r . The r e p r e s e n t a t i v e v a l u e s h o u l d be between t h e 5 t h
and the 50th p e r c e n t i l e s and i s up t o a code committee t o d e c i d e . The
m a t e r i a l p r o p e r t i e s used i n t h i s r e s e a r c h can be compared t o t h e average
v a l u e s from ASTM t e s t i n g by o b s e r v i n g t h e f i n i t e element run f o r t h e ASTM
s i z e specimen {Z/D equal t o 1.0 and D/L e q u a l t o 0.33) shown i n F i g u r e
41. T h i s s i z e specimen has a v a l u e f o r Pu/(b£) as 730 p s i . Since the Wood
Handbook l i s t s t h e average s t r e s s a t t h e p r o p o r t i o n a l l i m i t as b e i n g 870 p s i
for the ASTM t e s t , and t h e s t r e s s c o n t i n u e s t o i n c r e a s e beyond the onset o f
y i e l d i n g , t h e m a t e r i a l p r o p e r t i e s used i n t h i s r e s e a r c h have l e s s s t r e n g t h
than average. For the purpose o f comparison i t i s a c c e p t a b l e t o choose a

- 41 -
e q u a l t o 465 p s i .
The minimum s i z e f o r t h e b e a r i n g p l a t e s f o r t h e beam i n F i g u r e 70 w i l l
be d e s i g n e d by b o t h t h e proposed method and t h e a l l o w a b l e s t r e s s method i n
examples I and I I . To o b t a i n r e a l i s t i c s i z e beams an a l l o w a b l e bending
s t r e s s o f 2400 p s i w i l l a r b i t r a r i l y be used f o r t h e beam s e l e c t i o n . The
e s t i m a t e d d e f l e c t i o n o f t h e b e a r i n g p l a t e w i l l a l s o be c a l c u l a t e d .
The b e a r i n g p l a t e s i z e w i l l be c a l c u l a t e d f o r a t r u s s i n example I I I and
for formwork i n example IV. The s e r v i c e l o a d s t r e s s a i s also calculated

r
s
i n each sample. The s e r v i c e l o a d s t r e s s i s t h e a l l o w a b l e stress i n the
allowable s t r e s s d e s i g n and t h e u n f a c t o r e d l o a d d i v i d e d by t h e b e a r i n g area
i n t h e proposed d e s i g n method.
EXAMPLE I :
span = 20 f t .
w = 1000 lb/ft
M = 1000x20 x1/8 = 50000

2
ft-lb
R = 10000 l b
Sreq = M/fb = 50000x12/2400 = 250 i n 3
Use 5x18 Sx = 270 i n 3
PROPOSED DESIGN METHOD ALLOWABLE STRESS DESIGN
Pu = 1.5 x R = 15000 l b
Pu = 15000 = . R
bDa 5x18x465 ~ a
o
10000 = 21.7 i n ^
from F i g u r e 67 %/V> =0.18 460
21.7
% = 0.18 x 18 = 3.24" = . 4.35"
A = 3.24x5 = 16.2 i n 2
0_ = 617 p s i
- 42 -
A u e
- ^ T +
°' 002]d
1 a
from F i g u r e 18 E./E =0.36
U n JoT^nnn
= ^5.0x3.24x75000 * 0.36 + 0 . 0 0 ) l 8 ;
2
= 0.10"
EXAMPLE I I :
span = 20'
w = 2000 lb/ft
M = 2000 x 2 0 2
x 1/8 = 100000 ft-lb
R = 20000 l b
Sreq = M/fb = 100000 x 12/2400 = 500 i n 3
Use 6 44 x 21 S = 496 i n 3
PROPOSED DESIGN METHOD ALLOWABLE STRESS DESIGN
Pu = 1.5 R = 30000
Pu = 30000 = o 46 —
bDcr 1x6.75x21x465 a,
o 1
from F i g u r e 67 Z/D = 0 . 2 6 = 2
°^°
Z = 0.26x21.0 = 5.46" = 43.5 i n 2
A = 36.9 i n 2
a = 542 p s i
s
E
^ = iz^T- ^ + 0.002)D Z = | ^ | = 6.44"
b£E. L
E
1 a
from F i g u r e 18 — = 0.43
a
A u = ( ^ _ x o.43 + 0.002) 21
U
^6.75x5.46x75000
= 0.14"
- 43 -
EXAMPLE I I I
A t r u s s , 40' l o n g with 2x8 chords and 0.15 k / f t l o a d i n g ,
then R = 20 x 0.15
= 3.0 k
Pu = 1.5 R
= 4.5 k
R 3.0
Pu 4 .J Area =
bDOo 1.5x7.5x0.465 0.460 0.46
= 0.86 6.52 i n 2
Area
from F i g u r e 67 £/D = 0.59
b
6.52
Jl = 0.59 x 7.5
1.5
4.35"
= 4.43"
Area = 4.65 x 1.5 = 6.66 i n 2
3.0
°s 4.43x1.5
= 0.450 k s i
EXAMPLE IV
A whaler c o n s i s t i n g o f two members has 1600 p l f l o a d i n g t h e r e f o r e each member
c a r r i e s 800 p l f .
form t i e s every 3 f t .
12 f t . members t h e r e f o r e 4 span'continuous
M = 0.107 x 800 x 3 x 3
= 770 f t - l b
R = 1.143 x 800 x 3
= 2740 l b
#2 & b e t t e r Douglas f i r Fb = 1300 p s i
Sreq = M/Fb = 770 x 12/1300
= 7.11 i n 3
- 44 -
Use 2x6 S = 7.56 i n 3
Continuous member use 1/2 & and 1/2 R f o r a n a l y s i s
PROPOSED DESIGN METHOD ALLOWABLE STRESS METHOD
Pu = 1/2 x 1.5 x 2740
= 2055 l b
Pu 2055 2740
=
Area =
bDC ~ 1.5x5.5x465 460
o
= 0.54 = 5.96 i n
=
5
'9 6
1.5
2 D
= 3.98"
1 = 2x0.33x5.5
= 3.63"
J_2
Area = 1.5x3.63 = 5.45 i n
2740
= 503 p s i
5.45
4.6 Comparing t h e Proposed Design Method w i t h t h e M o d i f i c a t i o n F a c t o r s o f
CSA STANDARD 086
A comparison o f t h e proposed d e s i g n method and t h e m o d i f i c a t i o n factors
of CSA STANDARD 086 c l a u s e 3.3.2.5 i s shown i n F i g u r e 71. The s e r v i c e load
s t r e s s e s on t h e v e r t i c a l a x i s o f t h e graph a r e t h e expected s t r e s s e s applied
t o the b e a r i n g . Again a l o a d f a c t o r o f 1.5 i s used t o o b t a i n t h e s e r v i c e
l o a d s t r e s s e s f o r t h e proposed d e s i g n method, t h a t i s , Pu/(b£a ) Q obtained
from the proposed method i s d i v i d e d by 1.5 and m u l t i p l i e d by a equal t o
465 p s i t o o b t a i n the s e r v i c e l o a d s t r e s s e s . The graph shows the t r e n d s a r e
t h e same a l t h o u g h t h e proposed method has d i f f e r e n t v a l u e s f o r d i f f e r e n t
depths. A f e a t u r e o f the proposed method i s t h e minimum end d i s t a n c e o f 3
i n c h e s i s not r e q u i r e d .
- 45 -
CHAPTER 5
SUMMARY
The b e h a v i o u r o f wood s u b j e c t e d t o compression l o a d s p e r p e n d i c u l a r to
g r a i n has been found t o be s t r o n g l y dependent on geometry. T h i s dependence
on geometry i s shown t o be s t r o n g i n both the l i n e a r and nonlinear range of
loading.
The l o a d i s d i s t r i b u t e d i n t o the specimen of wood by h i g h shear stresses
o c c u r r i n g near the edges o f the b e a r i n g p l a t e and by stresses perpendicular
t o the g r a i n under the p l a t e . The shear s t r e s s e s are shown t o c a r r y an
i n c r e a s e d p o r t i o n of the l o a d when the b e a r i n g p l a t e l e n g t h i s reduced.
The present method of d e t e r m i n i n g d e s i g n v a l u e s t e s t s one specific
geometry. Therefore, the p r e s e n t method does not represent wood's c a p a c i t y
t o w i t h s t a n d compression loads a p p l i e d p e r p e n d i c u l a r t o g r a i n i n the various
geometries of b e a r i n g conditions occurring i n practice.
The present d e s i g n method c o n s i d e r s the dependence on geometry with the
use of m o d i f i c a t i o n f a c t o r s when the b e a r i n g plate i s small. A comparison o f
the m o d i f i c a t i o n f a c t o r s and the proposed d e s i g n method shows s i m i l a r trends
of i n c r e a s i n g s t r e s s e s f o r d e c r e a s i n g bearing plate s i z e s . However, the
proposed d e s i g n method does not have the r e s t r i c t i o n s t h a t the use of the
modification factors has.
The d e s i g n method proposed i n the r e s e a r c h i s consistent with the
c a p a c i t i e s of b e a r i n g conditions occurring i n practice. However, the design
method was developed w i t h a f i n i t e element a n a l y t i c a l model u s i n g one set of
material properties. The design curves and e q u a t i o n s would change somewhat
i f a d i f f e r e n t s e t of m a t e r i a l p r o p e r t i e s was used. However, r e s u l t s

- 46 -
o b t a i n e d from t h e a n a l y t i c a l model show:
1) The l i n e a r behaviour E /E i s insensitive to variations i n the

a
material properties.
2) The n o n l i n e a r a p p l i e d s t r e s s v e r s u s s t r a i n curves a r e i n s e n s i t i v e t o
changes i n the m a t e r i a l p r o p e r t i e s E „ „, x , G and u, . ..

1 1 u 111
3) The c a p a c i t y P u / ( b £ a ) as d e f i n e d by t h e 0.2% o f f s e t c r i t e r i a i s
o
shown t o be a f u n c t i o n o f geometry and o n l y weakly dependent on t h e
material properties.
The terms E, and a would, o f course, be d i f f e r e n t f o r each s p e c i e s
l o
of wood.
The p r e s e n t d e s i g n method has d e s i g n v a l u e s f o r a and v a l u e s f o r E^
t h a t a r e d e r i v e d from t h e ASTM t e s t where o n l y one t h i r d o f t h e c r o s s - s e c t i o n
is loaded. I f the f u l l c r o s s - s e c t i o n had been loaded, the v a l u e s f o r
and E would be reduced t o approximately 2/3 o f t h e v a l u e s from t h e ASTM
test.
In summary, t h e proposed d e s i g n method f o r s t r e s s i s r e s t a t e d :
1) For system A, the b e a r i n g p l a t e l e n g t h i s g i v e n by Z = Pu/tbo^).
2) For system B, use t h e d e s i g n curve i n F i g u r e 67. To f i n d t h e
b e a r i n g p l a t e l e n g t h , c a l c u l a t e t h e v a l u e f o r Pu/(bDO ) Q and s e l e c t
&/D from the design curve. The b e a r i n g p l a t e l e n g t h I i s equal
to Dx&/D. A l t e r n a t i v e l y , use e q u a t i o n 4.1:
bo v
bDo '
o o
The proposed d e s i g n method i n c l u d e s p r o v i s i o n s f o r e s t i m a t i n g t h e
d e f l e c t i o n o f the b e a r i n g p l a t e a t the l o a d Pu from e q u a t i o n 4.3.
Au=
(dnnr + °-002)d -
4 3
1 a
T h i s d e f l e c t i o n can be an important s e r v i c e a b i l i t y requirement i n some
structures.
- 47 -
REFERENCES
1. AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR TESTING AND MATERIALS, 1969. Standard methods
t e s t i n g s m a l l c l e a r specimens o f timber. ASTM D e s i g n a t i o n D143-53.
2. AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR TESTING AND MATERIALS, 1969. Standard method f o r
e s t a b l i s h i n g s t r u c t u r a l grades and r e l a t e d a l l o w a b l e p r o p e r t i e s f o r
v i s u a l l y graded lumber. ASTM D e s i g n a t i o n D245-69.
3. H e t e n y i , M. Beams on E l a s t i c Foundations, U n i v e r s i t y of Michigan Press.
Ann Arbor, 1946, pp. 24-25, 98.
4. U.S. FOREST PRODUCTS LABORATORY, 1974. Wood Handbook, USDA A g r i c u l t u r e
Handbook, No. 72, pp. 4-6 - 4-16.
5. F o s c h i , R.O. and B a r r e t t , J.D. L o n g i t u d i n a l Shear S t r e n g t h o f Douglas
fir. Canadian J o u r n a l o f C i v i l E n g i n e e r i n g , V o l . 3., No. 2, June
1976, pp. 198-208.

- 48 -
APPENDIX A
D e r i v a t i o n of the O r t h o t r o p i c Rectangular F i n i t e Element
F i g u r e A1 shows the r e c t a n g l e with i t s 8 degrees o f freedom. The degrees
o f freedom a r e shown outward o n l y f o r ease i n d e r i v a t i o n .
I f A i = u n i t y while a l l o t h e r A=0, 8 nodal f o r c e s are developed. If A 4
= u n i t y w h i l e a l l o t h e r a r e zero, t h e same 8 n o d a l f o r c e s a r e developed
although they are a s s o c i a t e d with d i f f e r e n t degrees o f freedom. Similar
c o n d i t i o n s e x i s t when A5 o r As e q u a l u n i t y w h i l e a l l o t h e r s a r e zero. Hence,
columns 1, 4, 5 and 8 c o n t a i n t h e same 8 unknowns [a, b, c, d, e, f , g, h]
but i n a d i f f e r e n t sequence f o r each column. The degrees o f freedom i n t h e
y - d i r e c t i o n have s i m i l a r r e l a t i o n s h i p s . Hence, columns 2, 3, 6 and 7 c o n t a i n
a different s e t o f unknowns [ i , 3, k, I, m, n, <(>, p] b u t i n a d i f f e r e n t
sequence f o r each column. T h e r e f o r e , t h e 8x8 element s t i f f n e s s m a t r i x K has
16 unknowns and i s shown below.
a i I d e m P h
b 3 k c f n • g
c k P b g • n f
d a i a h P m e
K = e m P % a i I d
f n g b 3 k c
g n f c k 3 b
h P m e d i i a
S i x t e e n e q u a t i o n s a r e n e c e s s a r y t o s o l v e t h e 16 unknowns.
By symmetry o f the s t i f f n e s s m a t r i x :
b = i A1
c = I A2
f = m A3
g = p A4
- 49 -
By s t a t i c s o f the f r e e b o d i e s of Figure A2:
a + h = e + d A5
b + c = f + g A6
R(a-d) f - c A7
i + p = £ + m A8
3 + k = n + <|> A9
R(i-£) n - k A10
F o r c e s and d e f l e c t i o n from a c o n s t a n t s t r e s s i n the x - d i r e c t i o n as shown
i n Figure A3 y i e l d the f o l l o w i n g two e q u a t i o n s :
a + h - R(i+£)u = A11
xy 2
b + g - R(f3+k)y = 0 A12
xy
A p p l i c a t i o n o f c o n s t a n t s t r e s s i n the y - d i r e c t i o n y i e l d s :
(3 + k)R - (b + g)y = ^ A13

xy 2
( i + SL)R - (a + h)y = 0 A14
xy
However, o f the f o u r e q u a t i o n s based on the c o n s t a n t s t r e s s s t a t e , only
t h r e e are independent because of the r e l a t i o n s h i p y xvE = y vxE

xy x yx y
r
Gt
The c o n s t a n t shear c o n d i t i o n gives a - d = — A15
2R
Application o f a l i n e a r bending d i s t r i b u t i o n t o the s i d e s of l e n g t h RL
as i n F i g u r e A4 y i e l d s :
ExRt A 1 6
a + d - e- h =
3
A p p l i c a t i o n of a bending d i s t r i b u t i o n t o the s i d e s of l e n g t h L yields:

50 -
The r e s u l t i n g 16 e q u a t i o n s (A1 t o A13 and A15 t o A17) yield:
a = X + y + *
x x x
b = u X /R + RY X + Y + *
xy x x y y y
C = U X /R - RY k 2X - 3
y
xy x x
a
d = a - 2Y__
2X + 2Y - a m
x x
n 2X + 2Y -
y y
g = c <t> 3 - 2Y
h 2X - a P = c
x
R E t E t
x X y
where 4R(1-u y )
4(1-u pyx) xy yx
xy
Gt RGt
"Y.- 4R
Art
RtEx tEy
12 12R
C o n v e r t i n g the m a t r i x t o the g l o b a l c o o r d i n a t e system o f F i g u r e A5
yields:
a b -d c -e -b h -c
b -c k -b -n c -<t>
-d -c a -b h c -e b
c k -b 3 -c -4> b -n
K = -e -b h -c a b -d c
-b -n c -tj. b 3 -c k
h c -e b -d -c a -b
-c -<t> b -n c k -b 3
- 51 -
Cross-Section
Area Depth E
l °p
Specimen (in x in) (in) (ksi) (psi)
A1 2.75 x 6.0 9.44 56 -325

A3 2.75 x 6.0 9.44 60 -325
B1 2.55 x 4.17 8.45 52.6 -350
B3 2.55 x 4.25 8.42 53.2 -350
TABLE I a
Specimen A2
P P
SL D L b A I D L b A
(in) (in) (in) (in) (k/in) (in) (in) (in) (in) (k/in)
11.0 9.44 24.0 2.75 211 5.0 4.13 24.0 2.75 297
8.0 9.44 24.0 2.75 195 3.0 4.13 24.0 2.75 238
5.0 9.44 24.0 2.75 180 2.0 4.13 24.0 2.75 200
3.0 9.44 24.0 2.75 143 1.0 4.13 24.0 2.75 139
1.0 9.44 24.0 2.75 83 5.0 3.13 24.0 2.75 428
11.0 6.13 24.0 2.75 363 3.0 3.13 24.0 2.75 315
8.0 6.13 24.0 2.75 333 2.0 3.13 24.0 2.75 260
5.0 6.13 24.0 2.75 284 1.0 3.13 24.0 2.75 174
3.0 6.13 24.0 2.75 223 5.0 2.13 24.0 2.75 640
1 .0 6.13 24.0 2.75 133 3.0 2.13 24.0 2.75 456
11.0 4.13 24.0 2.75 417 2.0 2.13 24.0 2.75 371
8.0 4.13 24.0 2.75 392 1.0 2.13 24.0 2.75 220
5.0 4.13 24.0 2.75 322 5.0 1.16 24.0 2.75 806
3.0 4.13 24.0 2.75 274 3.0 1.16 24.0 2.75 556
1.0 4.13 24.0 2.75 190 2.0 1.16 24.0 2.75 461
1.0 1.16 24.0 2.75 306
TABLE I ELASTIC TEST DATA

- 52 -
Specimen A4
P P
£ D L b A £ D L b A
(in) (in) (in) (in) (k/in) (in) (in) (in) (in) (k/in)
11.0 9.31 24.0 2.75 274 11.0 4.06 24.0 2.75 418
8.0 9.31 24.0 2.75 251 8.0 4.06 24.0 2.75 384
5.0 9.31 24.0 2.75 211 5.0 4.06 24.0 2.75 325
3.0 9.31 24.0 2.75 173 3.0 4.06 24.0 2.75 238
1.0 9.31 24.0 2.75 117 1.0 4.06 24.0 2.75 145
11.0 6.06 24.0 2.75 377 11.0 2.13 24.0 2.75 631
8.0 6.06 24.0 2.75 334 8.0 2.13 24.0 2.75 574
5.0 6.06 24.0 2.75 279 5.0 2.13 24.0 2.75 480
3.0 6.06 24.0 2.75 218 3.0 2.13 24.0 2.75 337
1.0 6.06 24.0 2.75 151 1.0 2.13 24.0 2.75 224
0.38 2.13 24.0 2.75 101
Specimen B2
15.9 8.34 15.9 2.55 253 4.0 4.25 15.9 2.55 267
12.0 8.34 15.9 2.55 248 2.0 4.25 15.9 2.55 189
8.0 8.34 15.9 2.55 221 4.0 2.26 15.9 2.55 353
4.0 8.34 15.9 2.55 171 3.0 2.26 15.9 2.55 327
8.0 4.25 15.9 2.55 362 2.0 2.26 15.9 2.55 267
6.0 4.25 15.9 2.55 307 1.0 2.26 15.9 2.55 168
TABLE I ELASTIC TEST DATA (cont'd)

- 53 -
% D
E
l I D
E
l
TJ L" W TJ TJ E~
a a
1.17 0.39 0.881 1.21 0.17 0.650

0.85 0.39 0.693 0.73 0.17 0.489
0.53 0.39 0.469 0.49 0.17 0.391
0.32 0.39 0.354 0.24 0.17 0.275
0.11 0.39 0.204 1.60 0.13 0.597
1.79 0.26 0.788 0.96 0.13 0.486
1.31 0.26 0.625 0.64 0.13 0.392
0.82 0.26 0.458 0.32 0.13 0.293
0.49 0.26 0.350 2.35 0.089 0.585
0.16 0.26 0.196 1.41 0.089 0.494
2.66 0.17 1.019 0.94 0.089 0.404
1.94 0.17 0.788 0.47 0.089 0.341
1.21 0.17 0.600 4.31 0.048 0.853
0.73 0.17 0.423 2.59 0.048 0.743
0.24 0.17 0.203 1.72 0.048 0.595
0.86 0.048 0.448
1.18 0.39 0.687 2.73 0.17 1.043

0.86 0.39 0.546 1.99 0.17 0.826
0.54 0.39 0.408 1.24 0.17 0.609
0.32 0.39 0.295 0.74 0.17 0.496
0.11 0.39 0.150 0.25 0.17 0.275
1.82 0.25 0.770 5.16 0.089 1 .034
1.32 0.25 0.631 3.76 0.089 1.045
0.83 0.25 0.475 2.35 0.089 0.780
0.50 0.25 0.366 1.41 0.089 0.667
0.17 0.25 0.180 0.47 0.089 0.335
0.18 0.089 0.284
1.91 0.52 1.018 0.94 0.27 0.476

1.44 0.52 0.783 0.47 0.27 0.336
0.96 0.52 0.586 1.79 0.14 0.676
0.48 0.52 0.377 1.33 0.14 0.548
1.88 0.27 0.701 0.88 0.14 0.447
1.41 0.27 0.620 0.42 0.14 0.338
TABLE I I ELASTIC TESTING DATA IN DIMENSIONLESS FORM

- 54 -
E E
E E G y _L _1 G
11 1 n 1 E G E
(ksi) (ksi) (ksi) 11 11
Sample A 1390+ 58.0* 77.3+ 0.36+ 0.0417 0.750 0.0556
Sample B 1270+ 52.9* 70.5+ 0.36+ 0.0417 0.750 0.0556
Finite Element 1800 75.0 100 0.36 0.0417 0.750 0.0556
* from t e s t i n g
+ estimated
TABLE I I I VALUES AND RATIOS FOR THE MATERIAL PROPERTIES

- 55 -
I D L b I D
Geometry (in) (in) (in) (in) D L
A 2 2 6 1 1.00 0.33
B 2 2 10 1 1.00 0.20
C 1 2 5 1 0.50 0.40
STANDARD RATIOS „
E|| = 0.0417 r
G = 0.750 UJ.II = 0.36
Altered Altered Ex % of
Geometry Value Ratio. Standard
E
a
A standard 0.571 100

El
A 1.25xE M E M =0.033 0.566 99.1
Ex
A 1.25xG G =0.60 0.558 97.7
A 1.25uxll Uj.ll =0.45 0.570 99.8
B standard 0.560 100

Ex
B 1.25xE|| E|| =0.033 0.554 98.9
E±
B 1.25xG G =0.60 0.547 97.6
B 1-25yj.il yj.li =0.45 0.560 100
C standard 0.398 100

Ex
C 1.25xE,| E|| =0.033 0.394 99.0
Ex
C 1.25xG G =0.60 0.386 97.0
C 1.25yj.il yj.1l =0.45 0.398 100
TABLE IV EFFECT OF VARYING RATIOS FOR THE MATERIAL PROPERTIES

£ D a Pu (1 )-(2)x100%
Sample D L o b£ (1) (2) (1)
(psi) (psi)
C 0.88 0.40 285 500 1.75 1.59 + 10

D 1.0 0.33 580 825 1.42 1.54 - 8
E 1.0 0.33 675 970 1.44 1.54 - 7
F 1.14 0.30 420 660 1.54 1.50 + 3
Ul
(1) b£a from t h e f i n i t e element runs f o r t h e t e s t samples

o
Pu
(2) b£o from F i g u r e 54 ( M a t e r i a l P r o p e r t i e s i n F i g u r e 38)
TABLE V COMPARISON OF THE STRESS @ 0.2% OFFSET FOR SPECIMENS WITH

DIFFERENT MATERIAL PROPERTIES
- 57 -
= 44 k s i
o b t a i n e d from F i g u r e 67
o b t a i n e d from F i g u r e 10
A
I Pu i Au
£jf
E
TJ BT TT x 100%
*a"
(ksi)
1.0 0.415 0.70 0.0023 0.0058 39

0.5 0.688 0.53 0.00088 0.0069 13
0.25 0.818 0.38 0.00040 0.0061 6.5
0.125 0.930 0.24 0.00019 0.0050 3.8
TABLE VI COMPARING THE DIFFERENTIAL DEFLECTION TO THE AVERAGE

DEFLECTION OF THE BEARING PLATE
- 58
Fig. 2. DEFINITION OF THE PROPORTIONAL LIMIT

load
direction
Al A2 A3 A4 9.44"
I
24" m-6" 24'
load
direction
a) Sample A
8. 34
b) Sample B
I'ig. 3 ELASTIC TESTING SAMPLES

P,A
'igid plate
r *i
1
D
L —
Fig. 4 GENERAL TEST ARRANGEMENT

- 61 -
P,
P (k)
A (in)
Fig. 5 T Y P I C A L LOAD D E F L E C T I O N PLOT

- 62 -
Fig. 6 DATA FROM S P E C I M E N A2

- 63 -
Fig. 7 DATA FROM S P E C I M E N A4

- 64 -
T " — I —I
—r- — I — -
0.5 1. 0 1.5 2.0 2. 5
L
D
F i g . 8 DATA FROM SPECIMEN B2

r> >
x K;
M
O (TJ
ro
percent of depth f o r each element
cr
ro
H.
vQ
TJ
I-
1
QJ
rt
/|Ax
JAy
ro
plate ± A x wood
plate = A y wood
ro
3
ro
o rt
cn
Ax
Ay
i-3 '> >
M X ^
freel\
freel
H Mi II O 1-
M. h
H
2
(D
ro
O
[
K ro 3
3 H-
h5 ro 3
3 (f C
rt 3
50 cn n
l—l H-
D ij
rt
H-
O
ro
cn
10 elements
x •<
Hi Ml
l-i M
ro ro
ro ro
- 59 -
Fig. 11 F I N I T E E L E M E N T AND T E S T I N G COMPARISON SPECIMEN A 2
- 68 -
I I 1 1 1
0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5
Fig. 12 FINITE ELEMENT AND T E S T I N G COMPARISON SPECIMEN A2

- 69 -
Fig. 13 F I N I T E E L E M E N T AND T E S T I N G COMPARISON SPECIMEN A4

- 70 -
F i g . 14 FINITE ELEMENT AND TESTING COMPARISON SPECIMEN B2

- 71
20
15
u
c
31
a
cu
u 10
J=P-r•20 0
4=1
20 40
Percentage Difference
15 a) A l l Test Data
20
15 H
u
c
0)
3
a)
in 10
-20 0 20 40
Percentage Difference
15 b) Excluding Data From Specimen A2
Fig. 15 FINITE ELEMENT AND TEST

DATA COMPARISON
- 72 -
p
- — I —*j
r - - — " d e f l e c t e d surface!
16a) TYPE II: End B e a r i n g No R o t a t i o n C o n f i g u r a t i o n
LJ
16b)TYPE III: End B e a r i n g Free R o t a t i o n C o n f i g u r a t i o n
F i g . 16 GEOMETRY OF OTHER LOAD CONFIGURATIONS

F i t J _ 2.7 — VS. GEOMETRY FROM F I N I T E ELEMENTS
Fig. 13 ~ V S . GEOMETRY FROM F I N I T E ELEMENTS
P ,A
rigid plate
beam
elastic foundation T
grain
UJ
Fig. 19 BEAM ON E L A S T I C FOUNDATION MODEL

Fig. 20 BEAM ON E L A S T I C FOUNDATION AND
F I N I T E ELEMENT COMPARISON
- 77 -
P i ,Aj
I P 2 , A 2
2 ^
Di D 2
L i _. 1 L 2
2 D~ 2
Ei Ej. _ EiAi£ i b EJLA £ b 2 2
and P D
Ea 2 PiDi 2 2
Fig. 21 R E L A T I O N S BETWEEN TWO CONFIGURATIONS

- 80 -
RL
Uj-ll E,
RL
M J_|| =0.36 un yj.ll x (Ej, o r E j J o r E x ' )/E„ f o r E„ >0
yj.il = 0 . 0 un 0.5 f o r E|| =0.0
Fig. 24 SELECTED MATERIAL PROPERTIES

- 81 -
Sample b(in) D (in) L (in)
C 1.81 4.0 1.00

D 2.0 2.0 6. 0
E 2 . 0 2 . 0 6.0
F 1.75 1.75 6.0
F i g . 25 RELATIONSHIP OF SPECIMENS IN A SAMPLE

- 82 -
Fig. 26 STRESS VERSUS STRAIN - TESTING SPECIMENS C l

AND C3
- 83 -
Fig. 27 STRESS VERSUS STRAIN - T E S T I N G

S P E C I M E N S D I AND D3
Fig. 28 STRESS VERSUS S T R A I N - T E S T I N G
S P E C I M E N S E l AND E 3
Fig. 29 STRESS VERSUS STRAIN - TESTING
SPECIMENS F l AND F3
Fig. 30 STRESS VS. STRAIN-TESTING SPECIMEN 2
EACH SAMPLE
- 87 -
n
Al
n = incremental d e f l e c t i o n f o r
the 1 s t i t e r a t i o n o f n t h
load increment
^n = incremental d e f l e c t i o n f o r
the f i n a l i t e r a t i o n of nth
load increment
n
Ll
— J AiL—
Fig. 31 L O A D - D E F L E C T I O N CURVE FROM COMPUTER PROGRAMME

- 88 -
START
INPUT JOINT DATA
I
INPUT MATERIAL DATA
SET ELASTIC Ej_ , E , G 11
FOR EACH ELEMENT

AND STORE
BUILD STIFFNESS
MATRIX K
BUILD LOAD
VECTOR P
SOLVE
KA = P
CALCULATE
- INCREMENTAL STRAIN
- TOTAL STRAIN
- Ej_, E ^ , G FOR
EACH ELEMENT
COMPARE CALCULATED CHANGE AND STORE

INCREASE Ej_, 1 1 ' E G
yes VALUES THAT ARE
LOAD WITH STORED. DIFFERENT
ARE ANY DIFFERENT?
SOLVE FOR
STRESSES
IS THE LOAD
n o
OR DEFLECTION
LARGE ENOUGH?
STOP
Fig. 32 PROGRAM FLOW CHART

Fig. 33 S T R E S S V S . S T R A I N F I N I T E E L E M E N T RUNS
Fig. 34 S P E C I M E N C 2 AND F I N I T E E L E M E N T COMPARISON
- 91 -
1.2
1.0
0.8
•rH
CM X! 0. 6
0.4
'III' i
2" '
II
0. 2
1 I'll
ill ill
0. 05
A
D
F i g . 3 5 SPECIMEN D2 AND FINITE ELEMENT COMPARISON

Fig. 36 S P E C I M E N E 2 AND F I N I T E E L E M E N T COMPARISON
Fig. 37 S P E C I M E N F 2 AND F I N I T E E L E M E N T COMPARISON
- 94 -
8.001
o,| (ksi)
1800 ksi G = 100 ksi
1
0. 014 Y
Pjj, = 0.36 |J|ix = IJJ.II * (Ej. o r Ejj or Ex" ) /E|| for E„ £0.0
Mx|| = 0.0 ynx =

°- 5 f o r E
ll =
°-°
Fig. 38 INPUT MATERIAL PROPERTIES

- 95 -
TYPE I: Centerline Loaded Configuration
1.2 -l
0.010 in/in—•—J
Fig. 39 APPLIED STRESS VS. STRAIN FINITE ELEMENTS

TYPE I: C e n t e r l i n e loaded
c o n f i g u r a t i o n
F i g . 40 APPLIED STRESS V S . STRAIN FINITE ELEMENTS

- 97 -P,A TYPE I : C e n t e r l i n e Loaded
I Configuration
Fig. 41 A P P L I E D STRESS VS. STRAIN F I N I T E ELEMENTS

Fig. 42 APPLIED STRESS V S . STRAIN FINITE ELEMENTS
Fig. 43 APPLIED STRESS VS STRAIN FINITE ELEMENTS
- 100 -
- 101 -
Type I I : End B e a r i n g No Rotation

Configuration
Fig. 45 APPLIED STRESS VS. STRAIN F I N I T E ELEMENTS
(
- 102 -
P , A
' Type II: End B e a r i n g No R o t a t i o n
I C o n f i g u r a t i o n
F i g . 46 APPLIED STRESS V S . STRAIN FINITE ELEMENTS

- 103 -
Fig. 47 A P P L I E D STRESS VS. STRAIN FINITE ELEMENTS

- 104 -
PA
' Type III: End Bearing Free Rotation
I Configuration
Fig. 48 APPLIED STRESS VS. STRAIN FINITE ELEMENTS

- 105 -
P , A
Type III: End B e a r i n g F r e e Rotation
I
Configuration
Fig. 49 A P P L I E D STRESS VS. STRAIN FINITE ELEMENTS

- 106 -
Type III: znd B e a r i n g Free R o t a t i o n
F i g 50 APPLIED STRESS V S . STRAIN FINITE ELEMENTS

- 107 -
Fig. 51 DEFINITION OF THE O F F S E T METHOD

- 108 -
Type I: Centerline Loaded Configuration
1.2'-*
Fig. 52 STRESSES @ 0.2% O F F S E T V S . GEOMETRY

- 109 -
Fig. 53 DEFINITION OF 0 Q
- 110 -
Type I: Centerline Loaded Configuration
0.00620
-1* r
Fig. 54 NORMALIZED STRESS @ 0.2% OFFSET V S . GEOMETRY

- I l l-
Type I I : End B e a r i n g No R o t a t i o n Configuration
465
75000
2.0,
0.00620
1.5.
û
b£ a o
1.0'
t
I
i II
D
J -J
— 1
i
0.5 1.0 1.5 2. 0
l_
D
Fig. 55 NORMALIZED S T R E S S @ 0.2% O F F S E T V S . GEOMETRY

- 112 -
Type I I I : End B e a r i n g Free Rotation Configuration

P = 700xD
700 p s i @ 0.2% o f f s e t
b = 1
a v g 2260 p s i
i n t o p 0.025D
M
OJ
1. 0 1
D
0. 4
L
225 p s i
0. 2 6 9 P 0.2 6 9P
Fig. 57 INTERNAL STRESSES AT THE 0 . 2 % OFFSET LEVEL OF APPLIED STRESS

P = 425D
b = 1
850 p s i @ 0 . 2 % o f f s e t
avg 2230 p s i
i n t o p 0.025D
1 = 0 5 *
= 0.4
0.372 P u. 254 P 0.372 P
Fig. 58 INTERNAL STRESS AT THE 0.2% O F F S E T LEVEL OF APPLIED STRESS

P = 263D
b = 1
1050 p s i @ 0.2% offset
avg 1990 p s i
in t o p 0.025D
455 p s i
0.400P 0.400P i
M
0.885D
I
= 0.25
0.80
213 p s i
0.400P 0.200P 0.400P
Fig. 59 INTERNAL S T R E S S AT THE 0.2% OFFSET LEVEL OF A P P L I E D S T R E S S

- 116 -
Fig. 60 P E R C E N T A G E OF A P P L I E D LOAD R E S I S T E D
BY SHEAR AT THE 0 . 2 % O F F S E T
- 117 -
F o r %• s m a l l o = 465 p s i
J_j ^
Fig. 61 CONTOUR LINES OF STRESS PERPENDICULAR TO

GRAIN DIVIDED BY APPLIED STRESS
118
Type I Free Lower
Boundary
1.01
free lower boundary
0.8
0.6
C4
0.4 - 0 D
D L (1) (2)
2. 00 0.20 620 650

1.00 0. 33 710 730
0. 50 0.10 865 900
0.2 0.25 0.20 1 0 5 0 1040
f
0.01 0. 02 0.03 0.04
A
D
Pu from type I centerline loaded configuration
(1)
b£
(2) ^~ from specimen with a free lower boundary as
above
Fig. 62 COMPARISON OF THE T Y P E I C O N F I G U R A T I O N AND A

C O N F I G U R A T I O N WITH A F R E E LOWER BOUNDARY
- 119 -
Fig. 63 E C C E N T R I C I T Y OF LOAD FOR NO ROTATION OF

BEARING P L A T E
P,A
F i g . 64 REDEFINITION OF TERMS FOR THE CENTERLINE LOADED CASE

- 121 -
2.01
1.5
Pu
b£ o o
1.0
0.8
type II
type I with geometric

0.5 t e r m s a s f r o m F i g . 63
"~l — 1 —
0. 5 1. 0 1. 5 2.0
Fig. 65 COMPARISON OF T H E C A P A C I T Y OF T H E T Y P E I
AND T Y P E I I C O N F I G U R A T I O N S
- 122 -

- 124 -
D e t a i l A
min. 3xD
a) Simple Beam
D
J
/
— J t U-
D e t a i l A
Pu | . Pu
2
J I 2
min.6xD J J U b
b) Continuous Beam
F i g . 68 DEFINITION OF GEOMETRIC TERMS FOR DESIGN CURVE

- 125 -
"I * I—
2
i
1
Aub
L
1
c h a n g e i n d i m e n s i o n D of
beam @ P u u n d e r t h e b e a r i n g
plate
~ < 0.5
1 1 1 I
0.25 0.5 0.75 1.0
X
D
Fig. 69 ERROR I N E S T I M A T E D DEFLECTION

- 126 -
Fig. 70 BEAM FOR DESIGN EXAMPLES

- 127 -
0.8
•H
CO
X 0.6
U]
<L>
10
10
CD
u
+J
Uj
rC
O
0.4
CD
CJ
•H
>
CD
Uj present design
method
0.2
r
- 1 ' t —
proposed design
D method
~1 1 1 1 • >
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0
Length of Bearing I (in!
Fig. 71 COMPARISON OF PROPOSED METHOD AND MODIFICATION

F A C T O R S OF C S A 08 6
- 128 -
t t
J\
y RL
. . . T. MJ —J t L—
r
1
i
Fig. A l ELEMENT CONFIGURAT
- 129 -
1 -1
RL
' h
J. L ^
a) Ai=l other A=0
1 ------- •~ r
- - - _ i «
RL
I: i o
b) /j =l
2 other A=0
Fig. A2 F R E E B O D I E S OF ELEMENT
g . A4 FORCES AND D E F L E C T I O N S FOR BENDING
- 131 -
Fig. A 5 G L O B A L DEGREES OF FREEDOM

Ubc - 1980 - A7 H35 - 4

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

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

Ubc - 1980 - A7 H35 - 4

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

BEHAVIOUR OF.

WOOD UNDER COMPRESSION

Christopher Percival Hall

Sc., The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia, 1976

THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF

THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF

MASTER OF APPLIED SCIENCE

THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES

to the required standard

THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA

an advanced degree at the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, I agree that

the Library shall make i t freely available for r e f e r e n c e and study.

I f u r t h e r agree t h a t p e r m i s s i o n f o r e x t e n s i v e copying o f this thesis

for s c h o l a r l y purposes may be granted by the Head of my Department or

by h i s representatives. It is understood that copying or p u b l i c a t i o n

of this thesis f o r f i n a n c i a l gain s h a l l not be allowed without my

The University of B r i t i s h Columbia

Present methods of determining design values for compression perpen-

d i c u l a r to grain involves the t e s t i n g of specimens of one s p e c i f i c geometry.

The geometry of this test i s very d i f f e r e n t from the geometries of bearing

conditions occurring i n practice. It was hypothesized that t h i s test does

not represent actual bearing conditions i n practice and the object of t h i s

thesis was to f i n d a more representative method of designing for compression

This thesis found the behaviour of wood i n compression perpendicular to

grain loading i s strongly dependent on geometry i n both the l i n e a r and

nonlinear ranges of applied loading. A f i n i t e element a n a l y t i c a l model,

d e f l e c t i o n i s strongly dependent on the modulus of e l a s t i c i t y perpendicular

to grain and nearly independent of other material properties. Also the

capacity was found to be dependent on a c h a r a c t e r i s t i c material term and only

weakly dependent on other material properties.

A design method, one which includes an estimate of the d e f l e c t i o n of the

posed design method i s v a l i d f o r the capacities of the d i f f e r e n t geometries

of bearing conditions occurring i n p r a c t i c e .

CHAPTER 2 - TESTING AND ANALYSIS IN THE ELASTIC RANGE 3

2.4 F i n i t e Element Model 8

2.5 Material Properties 9

2.6 Comparison o f Test R e s u l t s with F i n i t e Element P r e d i c t i o n s 10

2.8 Beam on E l a s t i c Foundation 13

CHAPTER 3 - TESTING AND ANALYSIS BEYOND THE ELASTIC RANGE 17

3.2 Material Properties 17

3.4 Nonlinear F i n i t e Element Model 19

3.6 Comparison o f T e s t R e s u l t s w i t h F i n i t e Element P r e d i c t i o n s 21

3.8 A n a l y s i s o f A p p l i e d S t r e s s e s and Geometry 23

3.9 Internal Stress Analysis 25

CHAPTER 4 - PROPOSED DESIGN METHOD 30

4.2 Bearing Conditions i n P r a c t i c e 31

D e t a i l s o f t h e Proposed Design Method 34

4.4b Estimate of the D e f l e c t i o n 36

4.4d L i m i t a t i o n s o f t h e Proposed Design Method 38

Comparing t h e Proposed Design Method w i t h t h e M o d i f i c a t i o n 44

TABLE I E l a s t i c Test Data 51

TABLE II E l a s t i c Testing Data i n Dimensionless Form 53

TABLE III Values and Ratios for the Material Properties 54

TABLE IV Effect of Varying Ratios f o r the Material Properties 55

TABLE V Comparison of the Stress @ 0.2% Offset for Specimens 56

TABLE VI Comparing the D i f f e r e n t i a l Deflection to the Average 57

Fig. 1 ASTM Test Arrangement 58

Fig. 2 D e f i n i t i o n of the Proportional Limit 58

Fig. 3 E l a s t i c Testing Samples 59

Fig. 4 General Test Arrangement 60

Fig. 5 Typical Load Deflection Plot 61

Fig. 6 Data from Specimen A2 62

Fig. 7 Data from Specimen A4 63