Asymmetrically combined glulam −

simplified verification of the bending strength

Matthias Frese, Hans Joachim Blaß
Karlsruher Institut für Technologie, Holzbau und Baukonstruktionen

Asymmetrically combined glulam (ACG) with lamellae of superior grade in the outer tensile
zone only is a more economical alternative compared to symmetrically combined glulam.
However the lower nominal strength in the compressive zone due to the minor strength class
inhibits the full use of the higher strength in the tensile zone, cf. [1]. An example of the stress
distribution in the cross-section of ACG is shown in Fig. 1 (left). Here, the compressive stress
exceeds the local nominal strength in the compressive zone, when the maximum tensile stress
reaches the local nominal strength in the tensile zone.
Using a validated computer model the bending capacity of ACG is simulated [2]. In doing so,
the compressive stress is not limited by a nominal strength of a particular strength class and,
therefore, plastic strains may occur to a certain extent in the compressive zone. The influence
of the wood moisture content (u) on the bending capacity is determined as well. Based on the
simulation results, the bending modulus of elasticity (MOEmean) and the effective characteris-
tic bending strength (fm,g,k,eff) are calculated. Three beam types are investigated (Fig. 1, right).
The variable n enables a stepwise conversion of the cross-section in order to study the influ-
ence of different layups on the mechanical properties: For n = 0 the material belongs exclu-
sively to the strength class present in zone 2 and for n = 20 to the class in zone 1. The com-
puter model considers the stochastic mechanical properties of timber.

Fig. 1 Left: Example of a stress distribution in ACG. Right: Test configuration and beam
types investigated

Fig. 2 shows the relation between the MOE/the strength and the layup. Depending on the in-
dividual stiffness of the lamellae used for the material simulation, the MOEmean increases from
12.4 GPa (n = 0) to 12.9 (n = 20) for type I and from 12.9 to 15.9 for type III. The ratio of the
MOE values, belonging to type I, is 1.04 (= 12.9/12.4) only, while for the type III the ratio
comes to 1.23. The results of type II lie in between. Due to the pronounced difference be-
tween both ratios, the initial strength increase is more pronounced for type I than for III. One
lamella of superior grade enhances the entire cross-section of the type I, whereas at least three
of superior grade (cf. Fig. 1, left) are necessary to enhance type III significantly. Fig. 3 (left)
shows the influence of the moisture content on the strength. Compared to 12 %, an increase to
1
16 % hardly affects the strength, in particular for small n-values. The influence of 20 % is
moderate; compared to 12 %, the absolute strength reduction is about 1 MPa.
Fig. 3 (right) illustrates the agreement between the simulated strength and the one, calculated
on the basis of the theory of the composite beams. In the diagram, the s-shaped curve reflects
the effective characteristic bending strength for the case that the nominal strength, present in
the tensile zone, limits the bending capacity only. A simplified verification of the bending
strength is, therefore, conceivable, where the verification of the bending strength in the outer
compressive zone may be disregarded. The conditions for this simplification are: The differ-
ence in nominal strength between the two outer zones does not exceed 8 MPa and the ratio of
the moduli of elasticity of the outer tensile and compressive zone does not exceed 1.25.
The results are currently discussed for being included in the strength modelling of ACG in the
European product standard for glulam [3].

16 32
Type I
II
15 III
MOEmean [GPa]

fm,g,k,eff [MPa]
28

14

24
13
Type I
II
III
12 20
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
n n
Fig. 2 Mechanical properties and gradually converted cross-section
32 32

30 30
fm,g,k,eff [MPa]

fm,g,k,eff [MPa]

28 28

26 26

24 u 12 % 24 Method
16 % Simulation (u=12 %)
20 % Theory composite beams
22 22
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
n n
Fig. 3 Left: Effective strength and moisture content. Right: Comparison between simula-
tion and theory of the composite beams. Type III investigated in both diagrams

[1] EN 1194:1999 Timber structures – Glued laminated timber – Strength classes and deter-
mination of characteristic values.
[2] M. Frese, HJ. Blaß: Bending strength of spruce glulam. European Journal of Wood and
Wood Products, 67 (2009), 277-286.
[3] prEN 14080 Timber structures – Glued laminated timber and glued solid timber – Re-
quirements.