Technical Papers
Dec 23, 2021

Cyclic Loading of Glued-In FRP Rods in Timber: Experimental and Analytical Study

Publication: Journal of Composites for Construction
Volume 26, Issue 2

Abstract

The axial load capacity and stiffness of carbon fiber–reinforced polymer (CFRP) and glass fiber–reinforced polymer (GFRP) rods glued in timber is investigated under cyclic loading as the main design consideration for structures that experience load reversal (e.g., due to wind loading). Load cycles at 20%, 40%, 60%, and 80% of the ultimate load and three repetitions per load cycle were considered. The main parameters examined are the effect of FRP rod, anchorage length, and construction scenario. The construction scenarios represent full contact between timber faces, gaps in joints due to long-term effects (e.g., viscoelastic creep) and manufacturing tolerances, and contact with other materials. The GFRP rods exhibit 23% higher axial load capacity and 20% lower axial tensile stiffness than CFRP rods for an embedment length of 5D, where D = diameter of the rod. The axial load capacity of the GFRP rods tends to plateau with increasing bonded length at anchorage lengths greater than 10D. Small gaps significantly decrease the axial compressive stiffness of the glued-in FRP rods at the first load cycles and the axial stiffness varies along the bonded length. An analytical methodology is presented to describe the bond stress transfer mechanism and the progressive bond degradation. The analytical tensile slip values agree fairly well with the experimental results when debonding takes place at 80% of the ultimate load.

Get full access to this article

View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.

Acknowledgments

The presented work is supported by a Leverhulme Trust Programme Grant “Natural Material Innovation.” The timber material was provided by Stora Enso. The authors would also like to thank the staff of the Structures Lab at the University of Cambridge (Lorna Roberts, Martin Touhey, David Layfield, and Phil McLaren).

Notation

The following symbols are used in this paper:
Aeff
effective tensile area in timber (tension stiffening effect) (mm2);
Ar
cross-sectional area of the rod based on the core diameter (mm2);
Aro
cross-sectional area of the rod based on the outer apparent diameter (mm2);
Aw
net timber cross-sectional area (mm2);
B15
coefficient in the bond strength equation of the Fu et al. (2000) model;
B26
coefficient in the bond strength equation of the Fu et al. (2000) model;
C21
coefficient in the bond strength equation of the Fu et al. (2000) model;
C22
coefficient in the bond strength equation of the Fu et al. (2000) model;
D
core diameter of the rod (mm);
Dh
hole diameter (mm);
Do
outer apparent diameter of the rod (mm);
Ee
elastic energy stored during cyclic loading (kN · mm);
Er
longitudinal elastic modulus of the rod;
Ep = Estorage−Ee
energy dissipation (kN · mm);
Estorage
total energy stored during cyclic loading (kN · mm);
Ew
longitudinal elastic modulus of the timber (GPa);
e
edge distance of glued-in rods (mm);
Fr
axial load (kN);
Fru
failure load (kN);
Frult,mon
ultimate failure load under monotonic tensile loading (kN);
fcw,0,m
timber mean compressive strength (MPa);
fru
mean tensile strength (MPa);
ftw,0,m
timber mean tensile strength (MPa);
fv
shear strength (MPa);
fvw,//,m
timber mean shear strength parallel to the grain (MPa);
fvw,┴,m
timber mean shear strength perpendicular to the grain (MPa);
G
bond fracture energy (MPa · mm);
Ga
adhesive shear modulus (GPa);
Gv
shear modulus (MPa);
Gw
timber shear modulus (MPa);
GII
mode II fracture toughness (MPa · mm);
Ke1
bond stiffness in the linear ascending branch of the bond stress–slip model (MPa/mm);
Ke2
bond stiffness in the linear descending branch of the bond stress–slip model (MPa/mm);
KII
stress intensity factor (MPa · mm1/2);
kb
bar type coefficient in the NZTDS (2007) design equation for the axial load capacity of glued-in rods;
ke
epoxy coefficient in the NZTDS (2007) design equation for the axial load capacity of glued-in rods;
km
moisture coefficient in the NZTDS (2007) design equation for the axial load capacity of glued-in rods;
Lb
bonded length (mm);
Le
length of a discretized element = 1 mm;
Lm
material factor in the GIROD design formula;
Lph
πDhLb = hole surface area (mm2);
Lpr
πD = rod perimeter (mm);
Lun
free unbonded length;
lgeo
geometrical factor in the GIROD design formula;
MC
moisture content (%);
pa
constant in the Lamè form of the through thickness shear stress in adhesive [Fu et al. (2000) model];
pw
constant in the Lamè form of the through thickness shear stress in timber [Fu et al. (2000) model];
qa
constant in the Lamè form of the through thickness shear stress in adhesive [Fu et al. (2000) model];
qw
constant in the Lamè form of the through thickness shear stress in timber [Fu et al. (2000) model];
RH
relative humidity (%);
r
radial coordinate, radius (mm);
ro
radial coordinate at the rod/adhesive interface (mm);
r1
radial coordinate at the wood/adhesive interface (mm);
r2
radial coordinate at the timber face (mm);
ua
axial displacement in the adhesive (mm);
uw
axial displacement in timber (mm);
sl
loaded end slip (mm);
slanal
analytical loaded end slip value (mm);
slexp
experimental loaded end slip value (mm);
sm
maximum slip in the ascending branch of the bond stress–slip model (mm);
su
maximum slip in the descending branch of the bond stress–slip model (mm);
ta
glue-line thickness (mm);
x
horizontal coordinate in the horizontal axis along the bonded length (mm);
αL
thermal coefficient of wood in the longitudinal direction;
αR
thermal coefficient of wood in the radial direction;
αT
thermal coefficient of wood in the transverse direction;
β
coefficient in the bond strength equation of the Fu et al. (2000) model;
γa
adhesive shear strain;
ɛr
longitudinal rod strain;
ɛru
elongation at break;
ɛw
longitudinal timber strain;
ν
Poisson’s ratio;
ξ
ξ = Ep/2π · Estorage= damping ratio (%);
ρk
characteristic timber density (kg/m3);
ρ,mean
mean timber density (kg/m3);
σro
rod axial stress (MPa);
τ
bond strength (MPa);
τa
through thickness shear stresses in the adhesive (MPa);
τfr
frictional bond strength (MPa);
τm
maximum bond strength in the ascending branch of the bond stress–slip model (MPa);
τra
bond strength at the rod/adhesive interface (MPa);
τw
through thickness shear stresses in the wood (MPa);
τwa
bond strength at the wood/adhesive interface (MPa); and
ω
parameter in the GIROD design formula for the axial load capacity of glued-in rods.

References

ACI (American Concrete Institute). 2001. Recommended test methods for FRP rods and sheets. Farmington Hills, MI: ACI.
ACI (American Concrete Institute). 2012. Guide test methods for fiber–reinforced polymers (FRPs) for reinforcing or strengthening concrete structures. ACI 440.3R-12. Farmington Hills, MI: ACI.
Aicher, S., M. Wolf, and P. J. Gustafsson. 1999. “Load displacement and bond strength of glued-in rods in timber influenced by adhesive, wood density, rod slenderness and diameter.” In Proc., 1st RILEM Symp. on Timber Engineering.
ASTM. 2009. Standard test methods for small clear specimens of timber. ASTM D143-14. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM.
ASTM. 2017. Standard test method for determination of moisture in plastics by loss in weight. ASTM D 6980-17. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM.
Ayatollahi, M. R., S. Shadlou, and M. M. Shokrieh. 2011. “Fracture toughness of epoxy/multi-walled carbon nanotube nano-composites under bending and shear loading conditions.” Mater. Des. 32 (4): 2115–2124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2010.11.034.
Broughton, J. G., and A. R. Hutchinson. 2001. “Adhesive systems for structural connections in timber.” Int. J. Adhes. Adhes. 21 (3): 177–186. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0143-7496(00)00049-X.
BSI (British Standards Institution). 1957. Methods of testing small clear specimens of timber. BS 373:1957. London: BSI.
BSI (British Standards Institution). 2001. Timber structures – Test methods – Cyclic testing of joints made with mechanical fasteners. BS EN 12512:2001. London: BSI.
BSI (British Standards Institution). 2019. Plastics. Determination of tensile properties. BS EN ISO 527-1. London: BSI.
BSI (British Standards Institution). 2021. Glued-in rods in glued structural timber products—Testing, requirements and bond shear strength classifications. BS EN 17334:2021. London: BSI.
CEN (European Committee for Standardization). 2004. Design of timber structures—part 1-1: General-common rules and rules for buildings. EN 1995-1-1: Eurocode 5. Brussels, Belgium: CEN.
Cepelka, M., and K. A. Malo. 2016. “Experimental study of the end grain effects in timber joints under uniaxial compression load.” In Proc., 2016 World Conf. on Timber Engineering.
Corradi, M., L. Righetti, and A. Borri. 2015. “Bond strength of composite CFRP reinforcing bars in timber.” Materials 8 (7): 4034–4049. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma8074034.
da Silva, L. F. M., P. J. C. das Neves, R. D. Adams, and J. K. Spelt. 2009. “Analytical models of adhesively bonded joints—Part I: Literature survey.” Int. J. Adhes. Adhes. 29 (3): 319–330. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijadhadh.2008.06.005.
De Lorenzis, L., and A. Nanni. 2002. “Bond between near-surface mounted fiber–reinforced polymer rods and concrete in structural strengthening.” ACI Struct. J. 99 (2): 123–132.
De Lorenzis, L., V. Scialpi, and A. L. Tegola. 2005. “Analytical and experimental study on bonded-in CFRP bars in glulam timber.” Composites, Part B 36 (4): 279–289. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2004.11.005.
DIN (Deutsches Institut für Normung). 2010. German national annex to EC5. DIN EN1995-1-1/NA: 2010-12. Berlin: DIN.
Fava, G., V. Carvelli, and C. Poggi. 2013. “Pull-out strength of glued-in FRP plates bonded in glulam.” Constr. Build. Mater. 43: 362–371. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2013.02.035.
Fu, S.-Y., C.-Y. Yue, X. Hu, and Y.-W. Mai. 2000. “Analyses of the micromechanics of stress transfer in single- and multi-fiber pull-out tests.” Compos. Sci. Technol. 60 (4): 569–579. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0266-3538(99)00157-8.
Gattesco, N., A. Gubana, M. Buttazzi, and M. Melotto. 2017. “Experimental investigation on the behavior of glued-in rod joints in timber beams subjected to monotonic and cyclic loading.” Eng. Struct. 147: 372–384. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2017.03.078.
Gonzales, E., T. Tannert, and T. Vallée. 2016. “The impact of defects on the capacity of timber joints with glued-in rods.” Int. J. Adhes. Adhes. 65: 33–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijadhadh.2015.11.002.
Gustafsson, P. J., and E. Serrano. 2002. GIROD—Glued in rods for timber structures. Development of a calculation model. Contract No. SMT4-CT97-2199, edited by C. Bengtsson and C.-J. Johansson. Lund, Sweden: Division of Structural Mechanics, LTH, Lund Univ.
Harris, R., B. Gusinde, and J. Roynon. 2012. “Design and construction of the Pods Sports Academy, Scunthorpe, England.” In Proc., 2012 World Conf. on Timber Engineering.
Horowitz, C. A. 2016. “Paris agreement.” Int. Leg. Mater. 55 (4): 740–755. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020782900004253.
Johansson, C.-J., and C. Bengtsson. 2002. GIROD—Glued in rods for timber structures test methods for production control. Contract No. SMT4-CT97-2199, edited by C. Bengtsson and C.-J. Johansson.
Ling, Z., H. Yang, W. Liu, S. Zhu, and X. Chen. 2018. “Local bond stress-slip relationships between glue laminated timber and epoxy bonded-in GFRP rod.” Constr. Build. Mater. 170: 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2018.03.052.
Madhoushi, M., and M. P. Ansell. 2004. “Experimental study of static and fatigue strengths of pultruded GFRP rods bonded into LVL and glulam.” Int. J. Adhes. Adhes. 24 (4): 319–325. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijadhadh.2003.07.004.
Mettem, C. J., R. J. Bainbridge, K. Harvey, M. P. Ansell, J. G. Broughton, and A. R. Hutchinson. 1999. “Evaluation of material combinations for bonded in rods to achieve improved timber connections.” In Proc., CIB-W18, Meeting 32.
Muhamad, R., M. Ali, D. Oehlers, and M. Griffith. 2012. “The tension stiffening mechanism in reinforced concrete prisms.” Adv. Struct. Eng. 15 (12): 2053–2069. https://doi.org/10.1260/1369-4332.15.12.2053.
NZTDS (New Zealand Timber Design Society). 2007. Timber design guide. Wellington, New Zealand: NZTDS.
O’Ceallaigh, C., K. Sikora, D. McPolin, and A. M. Harte. 2020. “Modelling the hygro-mechanical creep behaviour of FRP reinforced timber elements.” Constr. Build. Mater. 259: 119899. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.119899.
Ogrizovic, J., R. Jockwer, and A. Frangi. 2018. “Seismic response of connections with glued-in steel rods.” In Proc., 5th Meeting of the Int. Network on Timber Engineering Research.
Pecce, M., G. Manfredi, R. Realfonzo, and E. Cosenza. 2001. “Experimental and analytical evaluation of bond properties of GFRP bars.” J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 13 (4): 282–290. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0899-1561(2001)13:4(282).
Ratsch, N., S. Böhm, M. Voß, M. Kaufmann, and T. Vallée. 2019. “Influence of imperfections on the load capacity and stiffness of glued-in rod connections.” Constr. Build. Mater. 226: 200–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.07.278.
Riberholt, H. 1988. “Glued bolts in glulam-proposals for CIB code.” In Proc., CIB-W18, Meeting 21.
Roseley, A., M. P. Ansell, D. Smedley, and S. Porter. 2012. “Creep of thixotropic adhesives in bonded-in timber connections as a function of temperature and humidity.” In Proc., 2012 World Conf. on Timber Engineering.
Serrano, E. 2001. “Glued-in rods for timber structures—An experimental study of softening behaviour.” Mater. Struct. 34 (4): 228–234. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02480593.
Serrano, E. 2004. “A numerical study of the shear-strength-predicting capabilities of test specimens for wood-adhesive bonds.” Int. J. Adhes. Adhes. 24 (1): 23–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0143-7496(03)00096-4.
SP (Swedish National Testing and Research Institute). 2002. GIROD—Glued in rods for timber structures. Contract No. SMT4-CT97-2199, edited by C. Bengtsson and C.-J. Johansson. Boras, Sweden: SP.
Stepinac, M., H. Frank, T. Roberto, E. Serrano, R. Vlatka, and K. Jan-Willem. 2013. “Comparison of design rules for glued-in rods and design rule proposal for implementation in European standards.” In Proc., CIB-W18: Meeting 46.
Tannert, T., H. Zhu, S. Myslicki, F. Walther, and T. Vallée. 2017. “Tensile and fatigue investigations of timber joints with glued-in FRP rods.” J. Adhes. 93 (11): 926–942. https://doi.org/10.1080/00218464.2016.1190653.
Tastani, S. P., and S. J. Pantazopoulou. 2002. “Experimental evaluation of the direct pullout bond test.” In Proc., Int. Symp. Bond in Concrete-from Research to Standards.
Tepfers, R. 1998. “Bond of FRP reinforcement in concrete: A state-of-the-art in preparation.” In Symp. on Bond and Development of Reinforcement, Geotechnical Special Publication 180, 493–504. Farmington Hills, MI: ACI.
Titirla, M., L. Michel, and E. Ferrier. 2019. “Mechanical behaviour of glued-in rods (carbon and glass fibre-reinforced polymers) for timber structures—An analytical and experimental study.” Compos. Struct. 208: 70–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2018.09.101.
Tlustochowicz, G., E. Serrano, and R. Steiger. 2011. “State-of-the-art review on timber connections with glued-in steel rods.” Mater. Struct. 44 (5): 997–1020. https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-010-9682-9.
Toumpanaki, E. 2015. “Durability and bond performance of CFRP tendons in high strength concrete.” Ph.D. thesis, Univ. of Cambridge.
Toumpanaki, E., J. M. Lees, and G. P. Terrasi. 2018. “Bond durability of carbon fiber–reinforced polymer tendons embedded in high-strength concrete.” J. Compos. Constr. 22 (5): 04018032. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-5614.0000870.
Toumpanaki, E., and M. H. Ramage. 2018. “Bond performance of glued-in CFRP and GFRP rods in timber.” In Proc., 5th Meeting of the Int. Network on Timber Engineering Research, 1–15.
Toumpanaki, E., and M. H. Ramage. 2021. “Glued-in CFRP and GFRP rods in block laminated timber subjected to monotonic and cyclic loading.” Compos. Struct. 272: 114201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2021.114201.
Trautz, M., C. Koj, and H. Uchtmann. 2016. “Load bearing behaviour of self-tapping screws in laser-drilled guideholes.” In Proc., 2016 World Conf. on Timber Engineering, 238–245.
Verdet, M., J.-L. Coureau, A. Cointe, A. Salenikovich, P. Galimard, C. Delisée, and W. M. Toro. 2017. “Creep performance of glued-in rod joints in controlled and variable climate conditions.” Int. J. Adhes. Adhes. 75: 47–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijadhadh.2017.02.012.
Volkersen, O. 1938. “Die Nietkraftverteilung in zugbeanspruchten Nietverbindungen mit Konstanten Laschenquerschnitten.” Luftfahrtforschung 15: 41–47.
Xu, B.-H., J.-H. Guo, and A. Bouchaïr. 2020. “Effects of glue-line thickness and manufacturing defects on the pull-out behavior of glued-in rods.” Int. J. Adhes. Adhes. 98: 102517. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijadhadh.2019.102517.
Zhu, H., P. Faghani, and T. Tannert. 2017. “Experimental investigations on timber joints with single glued-in FRP rods.” Constr. Build. Mater. 140: 167–172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.02.091.

Information & Authors

Information

Published In

Go to Journal of Composites for Construction
Journal of Composites for Construction
Volume 26Issue 2April 2022

History

Received: Apr 23, 2021
Accepted: Oct 20, 2021
Published online: Dec 23, 2021
Published in print: Apr 1, 2022
Discussion open until: May 23, 2022

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Authors

Affiliations

Lecturer, Dept. of Civil Engineering, Univ. of Bristol, Queen’s Building, University Walk, Bristol BS8 1TR, UK (corresponding author). ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4208-3284. Email: [email protected]
Michael Ramage
Reader, Dept. of Architecture, Univ. of Cambridge, 1-5 Scroope Terrace, Cambridge CB2 1PX, UK.

Metrics & Citations

Metrics

Citations

Download citation

If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.

Cited by

  • Research status of glued-in rods connections in wood structures, Journal of Building Engineering, 10.1016/j.jobe.2022.105782, 65, (105782), (2023).
  • Behavior of FRP rods under uniaxial tensile strength with multiple materials as an alternative to steel rebar, Case Studies in Construction Materials, 10.1016/j.cscm.2022.e01241, 17, (e01241), (2022).

View Options

Get Access

Access content

Please select your options to get access

Log in/Register Log in via your institution (Shibboleth)
ASCE Members: Please log in to see member pricing

Purchase

Save for later Information on ASCE Library Cards
ASCE Library Cards let you download journal articles, proceedings papers, and available book chapters across the entire ASCE Library platform. ASCE Library Cards remain active for 24 months or until all downloads are used. Note: This content will be debited as one download at time of checkout.

Terms of Use: ASCE Library Cards are for individual, personal use only. Reselling, republishing, or forwarding the materials to libraries or reading rooms is prohibited.
ASCE Library Card (5 downloads)
$105.00
Add to cart
ASCE Library Card (20 downloads)
$280.00
Add to cart
Buy Single Article
$35.00
Add to cart

Get Access

Access content

Please select your options to get access

Log in/Register Log in via your institution (Shibboleth)
ASCE Members: Please log in to see member pricing

Purchase

Save for later Information on ASCE Library Cards
ASCE Library Cards let you download journal articles, proceedings papers, and available book chapters across the entire ASCE Library platform. ASCE Library Cards remain active for 24 months or until all downloads are used. Note: This content will be debited as one download at time of checkout.

Terms of Use: ASCE Library Cards are for individual, personal use only. Reselling, republishing, or forwarding the materials to libraries or reading rooms is prohibited.
ASCE Library Card (5 downloads)
$105.00
Add to cart
ASCE Library Card (20 downloads)
$280.00
Add to cart
Buy Single Article
$35.00
Add to cart

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Copy the content Link

Share with email

Email a colleague

Share