- Original Article
- Published:
Shear tests of double shear plate connector joints in sugi—Japanese larch composite glulam beams
Journal of Wood Science volume 52, pages 44–50 (2006)
Abstract
To study the shear strength of structural joints in sugi (Cryptomeria japonica D. Don) — Japanese larch (Larix kaempferi Carriere) composite glulam beams using structural connectors with double shear plates, shear tests were conducted on two types of joint (post-beam and girder-beam). Two types of the composite beam (240 and 300 mm depth) were prepared for the tests. Ordinary sugi glulam beam and Japanese larch glulam beam were also used as control specimens. The load—displacement curves of joints in composite beams were somewhere between those of sugi and Japanese larch glulam beams. The shear strength of joints in composite beams was higher than that in the sugi glulam beam control. However, the allowable loads of the joints in composite beams were lower than those in the sugi beam with 240 mm depth. Large variation of maximum load of the joints in the composite beams resulted in lower allowable load.
References
Hayashi T, Miyatake A (1991) Strength properties of Sugi composite glulam beams I (in Japanese). Mokuzai Gakkaishi 37: 200–205
Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry, and Fisheries (1996) Japanese agricultural standard for structural glued laminated timber. Japanese Agricultural Standards Association, Tokyo
Hayashi T, Karube M, Harada K, Mori T, Ohno T, Komatsu K, Iijima Y (2002) Shear tests of timber joints composed of Sugi composite glulam beams using newly developed steel connectors. J Wood Sci 48:84–490
Japan Housing and Wood Technology Center (2001) Design of the allowable load at wooden construction framework housing. Kogyo Chosakai, Tokyo
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Nakashima, Y., Harada, M., Hayashi, T. et al. Shear tests of double shear plate connector joints in sugi—Japanese larch composite glulam beams. J Wood Sci 52, 44–50 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10086-005-0711-1
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10086-005-0711-1