"GHEORGHE ASACHI" TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY OF IAȘI

Faculty of Civil Engineering and Building Services

Civil Engineering –Bachelor Program, English teaching, third year

Timber project

Student: Manole Iordana–Paula

Group 3306

2021-2022
 1. TIMBER MOISTURE CONTENT

Influence of moisture content on timber elements dimensions and density

• N=14
• Initial moisture content: ω0 = 0%
• Final moisture content: ωf = 30%
• Cross-section sizes (bxh): 12.6 x 15.6 cm
• Density at zero moisture content: ρ0 = 0.54 g/cm3
• Span of the beam: l = 470 cm

Wood Radial direction, βr Tangential direction, βt Longitudinal direction, βl

Softwood 0.12 0.24 0.01
Hardwood 0.2 0.4 0.01

w0 wf βT βL βR binitial bfinal hinitial hfinal Linitial Lfinal ρinitial ρfinal

0 0 12.6 15.6 470 0.54
0 5 12.751 15.787 470.24 0.5636
0 10 12.902 15.974 470.47 0.5870
0 15 0.24 0.01 0.12 12.6 13.054 15.6 16.162 470 470.71 0.54 0.6100
0 20 13.205 16.349 470.94 0.6328
0 25 13.356 16.536 471.18 0.6553
0 30 13.507 16.723 471.41 0.6776

13.6
13.5
13.4
13.3
width change [cm]

13.2
13.1
13
12.9
12.8
12.7
12.6
12.5
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
moisture content [%]
 16.8

16.6
height change [cm] 16.4

16.2

16

15.8

15.6

15.4
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
moisture content [%]

471.6
471.4
471.2
length change [cm]

471
470.8
470.6
470.4
470.2
470
469.8
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
moisture content [%]
 0.8

0.7
density change [g/cm3]

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
moisture content [%]
 2. ROOF DESIGN

Figure 2.a) Transversal cross-section Figure 2.b) Plan view

2.1 Evaluation of the roof loads

• Roofing self-weight
• Variable loads
o Live load given by the weight of a worker
o Climatic loads due to snow and wind loads

2.1.1 Dead loads at the roof level

Figure 2.1.1: Roof system-detail

 Specific weight Characteristic
Element Material Dimensions [m]
[kN/m3], [kN/m2] load [kN/m2]

Roof covering Ceramic tiles - 0.5 0.45

Cond barrier Hydro fug sheet - - -
Boarding OSB panel 0.018 7 0.126
Battens Battens 0.05*0.03*2*4kN/m3 4 0.048
Th insulation Mineral wool 0.2 0.4 0.08
Rafters 0.12*0.15*2.5*4kN/m3 0.072 0.072
Dead load on the roof level [kN/m2] 0.776

Variable loads
2.1.2 Wind loads

Location: Piatra-Neamt => qb = 0.6

The building is of importance III => Iw = 1.0
From the table in the left => ce(z) = 1.5,
considering that our building is located in a
zone of category III.

The roof is a double pitched roof, and it will be divided in action zones a follow:
The slope angle is 24˚, we will interpolate:
Slope angle Pressure and suction depending the wind direction =0˚
α F G H I J
15˚ -0.9 +0.2 -0.8 +0.2 -0.3 +0.2 -0.4 +0.0 -1.0 +0.0
24˚ -0.66 +0.5 -0.62 +0.5 -0.24 +0.26 -0.4 +0.0 -0.7 +0.0
30˚ -0.5 +0.7 -0.5 +0.7 -0.2 +0.4 -0.4 +0.0 -0.5 +0.0

Slope angle Pressure and suction depending the wind direction =90˚
α F G H I J
15˚ -1.3 -1.3 -0.6 -1.2 -0.5
24˚ -1.18 -1.36 -0.72 -1.2 -0.5
30˚ -1.1 -1.4 -0.8 -1.2 -0.5

Analyzing the tables, the maximum values for suction and pressure are: cpe=-1.36 & cpe=+0.5.

WIND-suction WIND-pressure
Iw 1 Iw 1
cpe,F,G -1.36 cpe,F,G 0.5
ce(z) 1.5 ce(z) 1.5
qb 0.6 qb 0.6
w -1.224 w 0.45

2.1.3 Snow loads

sk = 2.0 (Piatra-Neamt location)

Ce = 1.0 due to normal topography
Ct = 1 (thermal coefficient)
Slope angle = 24˚=> μ1 = 0.8

α1 α2
for case i: μi = μ1 = μ2 = 0.8
for case ii: μ1 = 0.5*0.8=0.4 & μ2=0.8
for case iii: μ1 = 0.8 & μ2=0.8*0.5=0.4
 μi = 0.8
SNOW
sk 2
μi 0.8
Ce 1
C1 1
Is 1
s 1.6

2.1.4 Live load

LIVE LOAD
QK [kN] 1
qK [kN/m2] 0.5

2.2 Design of the timber roof elements

2.2.1 Rafter Design
According to the scheme the afferent distance for one rafter is d1=0.82 m and the design length of
the inclined beam is l2=2.12m.
 Thickness Specific density Permanent loads
No. Structural elements
[m] [kN/m3] [kN/m2]
1 Ceramic tiles 0.45
2 Battens, 0.03*0.05m 0.01 3.4 0.034
3 Waterproofing -
4 Planking 0.025 3.4 0.085
5 Th insulation 0.2 0
6 Rafter 0.12*0.15m 0.15 3.4 0.51
Total Gk= 1.079

qsnow = s*dr = 1.6 kN/m2 *0.82m =1.31kN/m
gdead = groof * dr =1.08 kN/m2 *0.82m =0.88
kN/m
qwind =w*dr =0.45 kN/m2 *0.82m =0.37 kN/m
qsnow,z =qsnow*(cos 24˚)2 =1.31 kN/m * (0.9135)2=
1.09 kN/m
gdead,z =qdead*cos24˚=0.88 kN/m*0.9135=0.81kN/m
qwind,z =qwind* cos 24˚=0.37 kN/m2 * 0.9135 =0.34
kN/m

Qz=Q*cos 24˚ = 0.9135 kN

- cos α= cos 24˚= 0.9135

- sin α= sin 24˚= 0.407

Loading Hypothesis
• 1st hypothesis
q1design = 1.35 * gdead,z +1.5 * qsnow,z +1.05 * qwind,z = 1.35*0.81+1.5*1.09+1.05*0.34 = 3.08 kN/m
• 2nd hypothesis
- as uniformly distributed load : q3design = 1.35 * qdead,z = 1.09 kN
- as concentrated load: Qzdesign = 1.5*Qz = 1.5* 0.9135 = 1.37 kN
• 1st hypothesis
We divide the rafter in 2 parts to find the maximum bending moment:

The bending moments diagrams: M11max= 1.75 kNm & M12max=1.26 kNm
• 2nd hypothesis

The bending moments diagrams: M21max= 1.33 kNm & M22max=0.45kNm

From all cases, the maximum bending moment is from 1st hypothesis, 1.75 kNm.
• Design axial force Nc,d
Nc,d = 1.35 * Nperm + 1.5 * Nsnow
Nc,d = 1.35* 0.81*2.12 + 1.5* 1.09*2.12 = 5784.4 N
I. The strength check, Ultimate Limit State
In case of a timber beam subjected to bending the equation of bending stress is:

Mmax
where σmd = W
design bending stress
𝑏∗ ℎ 2 0.12∗ 0.152
W= 6
= 6
= 0.00045 m3
1.75
=> σmd = 0.00045
= 3888.89 kN/m2 = 3.89 N/mm2
𝑘𝑚𝑜𝑑 0.9
fmd = fm,k * = 24 N/mm2 * 1.3 = 16.62 N/mm2
𝑀
=> σmd  fmd

II. Deflection check, Serviceability limit state

• 1st hypothesis
ufin = ufin,G + ufin,snow +ufin,wind
5 0.81∗2.274
o ufin,G = uinst,G * (1+kdef) = [ 384 ∗ 11000000∗ 0.000034
] * (1+0.6)= 0.0012 m = 1.2 mm
5 𝑔𝑘 ∗ 𝑙 4
uinst,G =
384
∗
𝐸0,𝑚𝑒𝑎𝑛 ∗𝐼
gk = 0.81 kN/m2
d=2.27m
b∗ h3 0.12∗ 0.153
I = 12 = 12
= 0.000034 m3
E0,mean = 11 kN/mm2 = 11 000 000 kN/m2
Kdef = 0.6

1.09∗2.27 4
o ufin,snow =uinst,snow * (0 + 2* kdef)= [5/384*11000000∗ 0.000034
*(0.7+0.4*0.6) = 0.00095=0.95mm
5 𝑞𝑠,𝑘 ∗ 𝑙 4
uinst,snow = 384 ∗ 𝐸0,𝑚𝑒𝑎𝑛 ∗𝐼
gs,k = 1.09 kN/m2

o ufin,wind = uinst,wind * (0 + 2* kdef)=[5/384*(0.34*2.274)/(11000000*0.000034) *(0.6+0*0.6)

= 0.000189=0.19mm
5 𝑞𝑤,𝑘 ∗ 𝑙4
uinst,snow = 384 ∗ 𝐸0,𝑚𝑒𝑎𝑛 ∗𝐼

ufin = 1.2+0.95+0.19=2.34mm
ufin  uadm = (d/150….d/300) mm = 15.33…7.567 mm
=> ufin  uadm
2.2.2 Central purlin design
The design span for the central purlin is: lc=5.37-0.75 = 4.62m
Cross-section bxh=120x200 mm
Distance between 2 consecutive rafters: d1=0.82m
Distance between 2 king posts: L=5.37m
Distance between ridge purlin an an intermediary purlin: d2=2.18

Permanent Loads
• self-weight of the ridge purlin
gp=b*h*ρk*g = 0.12*0.2*340*9.81= 80.05 N/m
 • given by the weight of the rafter
gr = b*h* ρk*g = 0.12*0.15*340*9.81 = 60.04 N/m
nr = 6 (no. of rafters corresponding to span L)
gr,p = gr * d2 * nr/lc = 60.04 * 2.18 * 6/4.62 = 169.98 N/m
• given by the weight of the covering
gc,purlin = gcovering * d2 = 75 *2.18 = 163.5 N/m
pp = gp + gr,p + gc,purlin = 80.05+169.98 + 163.5 = 413.53 N/m

Variable loads
• given by snow load
sp = s*cosα * d2 = 1600 * cos 24˚ * 2.18 = 2486.45 N/m
• given by wind pressure
w = wpres* d2/2 * cos 24˚ = 450 * 2.18/2 * cos24˚ = 448.09 N/m

Live load
Qp=1000 N

Computational design
• 1st hypothesis: M = 1.35* Mperm + 1.5*Msnow + 1.05*Mwind
pp ∗l2c sp ∗l2c w∗l2c
M1 = 1.35 * 8
+ 1.5* 8
+ 1.05* 8
= 1489.48 + 9752.42 + 1255.3 = 12.497 kNm

• 2nd hypothesis: M = 1.35*Mperm + 1.5*Mlive

pp ∗l2c Q∗lc
M2 = 1.35* 8
+ 1.5 * 4
= 1489.48 + 1732.5 = 3221.98 = 3.22 kNm

=> Mmax = 12.5 kNm

The strength check, Ultimate Limit State

Mmax
where σmd = W
design bending stress
b∗ h2 0.12∗ 0.22
W= 6
= 6
= 0.0008 m3

 md = 12.5/0.0008 = 15625 kN/m2 = 15.62 N/mm2

 kmod 0.9
fmd = fm,k * = 24 N/mm2 * 1.3 = 16.62 N/mm2
M
=> σmd  fmd

Deflection check, Serviceability limit state

ufin = ufin,G + ufin,snow +ufin,wind
5 0.413∗4.624
o ufin,G = uinst,G * (1+kdef) = [ 384 ∗ 11000000∗ 0.00008
] * (1+0.6)= 0.0045 m = 4.5 mm
5 𝑝𝑝 ∗ 𝑙𝑐 4
uinst,G = 384 ∗ 𝐸0,𝑚𝑒𝑎𝑛 ∗𝐼
gk = 0.413 kN/m2
lc=4.62m
b∗ h3 0.12∗ 0.23
I = 12 = 12 = 0.00008 m3
E0,mean = 11 kN/mm2 = 11 000 000 kN/m2
Kdef = 0.6

2.48∗4.62 4
o ufin,snow =uinst,snow * (0 + 2* kdef)= [5/384*11000000∗ 0.00008
*(0.7+0.4*0.6) = 0.015=15 mm
5 𝑠𝑝 ∗ 𝑙𝑐 4
uinst,snow = 384 ∗
𝐸0,𝑚𝑒𝑎𝑛 ∗𝐼
gs,k = 2.48 kN/m2

o ufin,wind = uinst,wind * (0 + 2* kdef)= [5/384*(0.45*4.624)/(11000000*0.00008)] *(0.6+0*0.6) =

0.00182=1.82 mm
5 𝑤∗ 𝑙𝑐 4
uinst,snow = 384 ∗
𝐸0,𝑚𝑒𝑎𝑛 ∗𝐼

ufin = 4.5+15+1.82=21.32mm
ufin  uadm = lc/150 mm = 30.8 mm => ufin  uadm

2.2.3 Central post (king post) design

Post height is app to be equal with Hroof = 1.75m
Cross-section bxh=150x150 mm
Distance between king post and the closest queen post: d4=1.13m
Distance between 2 king posts: L=5.37m
Distance between ridge purlin and an intermediary purlin: d2=2.18m

Permanent load
• self-weight of the king post
Gpost= b*h* ρk*g*Hroof = 0.15*0.15*340*9.81*1.75= 131.33 N
• self-weight of the ridge purlin corresponding to the king post
Gpurlin,post =gp *L = 80.05 * 5.37 = 429.87 N
• given by the weight of the rafter, corresponding to the king post
gr = b*h* ρk*g = 0.12*0.15*340*9.81 = 60.04 N/m
nr = 6 (no. of rafters corresponding to span L)
Gr,post = gr * d2 * nr= 60.04 * 2.18 * 6 = 785.32 N
• given by the weight of the covering, corresponding to the king post
Gc,post = gcovering * d2 *L = 75 *2.18 *5.37= 878 N
Ppost = Gpost + Gr,post + Gpurlin,post + Gc,post = 131.33+429.87+785.32+878 = 2197.52 N

Variable loads
• given by snow load
sp = s*L* d4 = 1600 * 5.37 * 1.13* cos 24˚ = 8869.57 N
• given by wind pressure
w = wpres* d2/2 * cos 24˚ *L = 450 * 2.18/2 * cos24˚ *5.37 = 2406.24 N/m

Live load
Qp=1000 N

Computational design
Nc,d = 1,35 ∙ Nperm + 1,5 ∙ Nzăpadă + 1,05 ∙ Nvânt
Nc,d = 1,35 ∙ Ppop + 1,5 ∙ Spop + 1,05 ∙ Wpop,x
Nc,d = 1,35 ∙ 2197.52 + 1,5 ∙ 8869.57 + 1,05 ∙ 2406.24 = 18797.56 N

Strength check
fc,0,k = 21 N/mm2
E0,05 = 7400 N/mm2
𝐿𝑒 1750
i = 𝑖𝑖
= 43.3
= 40.41

I
ii = √A = 43.3 mm

I=0.154 / 12 = 4218.75 mm
=> rel = 0.73 > 0.3 => buckling may appear

k = 0.5*(1+0.2*(0.73-0.3)+0.732) = 0.81
kc = 1/ (0.81+ √0.812 − 0.732 ) = 0.86
σc,0,d = 18797.56/0.0225 = 0.835*106 N/m2
fc,o,d = fc,0,k*kmod/M =14.54*106 N/m2
σc,0,d /(kc* fc,o,d) = 0.067 <1
 3.TIMBER FLOOR DESIGN

Wood floor structure

Timber beam cross-section bxh: 100x150 mm

Thermal insulation (mineral wool): t=10cm
Joist span lsb=3.75m
Permanent loads
Permanent Loads
No. Structural elements Thickness [m]
[kN/m2]
1 Gypsum plate 0.025 0.15
2 Board 0.025 0.14
3 Slats 0.04 0.024
4 Wood floor 0.2
5 Mineral wool 0.025 0.0625
6 Board flooring 0.1
Total, Gk= 0.6765

Self-weight of the timber secondary beam

gsb = b*h*ρk * g = 0.1*0.15*340*9.81 = 50.03
=> psb = 0.67*0.8 + 0.05 =586 N/m

Live load
q=1.5 [kN/m2] = 1500 N/ m2
qsb = 1500*0.8 = 1200 N/m

Computing the cross-section internal forces & bending moments

• design bending moment
Md = 1.35 Mperm+ 1.5* Mlive
psb ∗l2sb 𝑞∗l2sb
Md = 1.35* 8
+ 1.5 8
= 1390.6 + 3164.06 = 4554.66 Nm = 4.55 kNm

• design shear force

Vd = 1.35 Vperm+ 1.5* Vlive = 1.35*psb * lsb/2 + 1.5 * qsb * lsb/2 = 4858.31 N = 4.85 kN

Strength checking
• bending checking

M
σmd = Wdd = 4554.66/0.000375 = 12.145 * 106 N/m2

bsb ∗h2sb 0.1∗ 0.152

W= 6
= 6
= 0.000375 m3

fmd = (fmk*kmod)/M = (24*0.9)/1.3 = 16.61 * 106 N/m2

=> σmd  fmd

• shear check

d = (Vd*Sy)/(bsb*Iy)= (4858.31*0.00056)/(0.1*0.000028) = 0.971 * 106 N/m2

Sy = (bsb*hsb2)/4 = 0.00056 m3
Iy = (bsb*hsb3)/12 = 0.000028 m4
fvd= (fvk*kmod)/ M = 2.5*0.9/1.3 = 1.73 * 106 N/m2
=> d < fvd

Stiffness checking
uinst,G = 5/384 * (psb*lsb4)/(Eo,mean * Iy) = 5/384 * (0.000586*37504)/(11*28125000) = 4.87 mm
ufin,G = 4.87 * (1+0.6) = 7.65 mm

uinst,Q = 5/384 * (qsb*lsb4)/(Eo,mean * Iy) = 5/384 * (0.0012*37504)/(11*28125000) = 9.98 mm

ufin,live = 9.98*(1+0.3*0.6) = 11.77 mm

Load combination u.inst [mm] w.fin [mm]

Gk 4.87 7.65
Qk 9.98 11.77
Gk + Qk 14.85 19.42

Final deflections must verify:

w.fin = 19.42 mm < lsb /150= 25 mm
 4. JOINT DESIGN

4.1 Establishing the general view for the connection

- characteristic density of rafter & boarding materials: ρk = 340 kg/m3
- width of timber boarding: s= 25 mm
- cross-section of rafter: bxh=120x150 mm

4.2 Choosing a nail type

The maximum length of nails should not exceed:
b/2 + s = 120/2+25= 85 mm
From table below we extract the nails with the numerical code 3

A condition according to which the nails must penetrate the rafter for a minimum length of 8d+s is
checked: 8d+2= 8* 4.25+25= 59mm < 76mm
4.3 Strength checking of laterally loaded nails:

Fv,Ed = Nc,d = 5784.4 N

Fv,Rd = n * Fv,Rk * kmod/M
kmod = 0.9 & M = 1.3
t1 = s = 25mm & t2 = L-t1 = 76-25= 51mm
For computing the embedding strengths of the timber elements, fh,l,k & fh,2,k, the necessity of
predrilled holes must be checked:
t=max [14*d]; [ (13*d-30) * ρk/200 ]
14*d=14*4.25 = 59.5mm
(13*d-30) * ρk/200 = (13*4.25 – 30)*340/200 = 42.93mm
=> t = 59.5mm
s= 25mm < 59.5mm =t
fh,l,k = fh,2,k = 0.082* (1-0.01*d) * ρk = 26.7 N/mm2
β = fh,l,k / fh,2,k = 1
Mrk = 0.3*fu*d2.6 = 0.3*400*4.252.6 = 5164.7 N/mm2
Fax,Rk = min (fax,k * d *t2 ) , (fax,k *d*t+fcap,k * dh2)
fax,k = (20*10-6)* ρk = 2.31 N/mm2
fcap,k= (70*10-6)* ρk = 8.09 N/mm2
fax,k * d * t2 = 2.31 * 4.25 * 51 = 500.69 N
fax,k *d*t+fcap,k * dh2 = 2.31*4.25*0.8+8.09*7.22 = 427.24 N
=> Fax,Rk = 427.24 N
Therefore, the bearing capacity of the fastener per shear plane can be evaluated as the minimum
result given by equations:

(a) = 26.7*25*4.25 = 2836.86 N

(b) = 26.7*51*4.25 = 5787.23 N
26.7∗25∗4.25 51 51 51 51 427.24
(c) = 1+1
∗ [ √1 + 2 + 12 ∗ [1 + 25 + (25)2 + 𝛽 3 ∗ (25)2 − 1 ∗ (1 + 25)] + 4
= 2237.2 N

26.7∗25∗4.25 4∗1∗(2+1)∗5164.07 427.24

(d) = 1.05* 2+1
∗ [√2 ∗ 1 ∗ (1 + 1) + 26.7∗4.25∗252
− 1] + 4
= 1305.9 𝑁
 26.7∗25∗4.25 4∗1∗(1+2∗1)∗5164.07 427.24
(e) = 1.05* 2+1
∗ [√2 ∗ 12 ∗ (1 + 1) + 26.7∗4.25∗512
− 1] + 4
= 2237.2 𝑁

2∗1 427.24
(f) = 1.15*√1+1 * √2 ∗ 5164.07 ∗ 26.7 ∗ 4.25 + 4
=
1351.78 N
=> Fv,Rk = 1305.9 N

4.4 Computing the number of nails

n*1305.9*0.9/1.3 = 5784.4 => n> 6.39

=> nef = 8 and the total number of nails is ntotal= 16

4.5 Nails distribution & arrangement

a1 = 5+5*1*4.25 = 26.25mm

a2 = (3+0)*4.25 = 12.75mm = 13mm

a3t = (7+5*1)*4.25 = 51mm

a3t = (3+2*0)*4.25 = 12.75mm = 13mm