Scancom Final Test Report

Transcription

UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DO PARANÁ
DETF – DEPTº ENG. TECNOLOGIA FLORESTAL
LABORATÓRIO DE TECNOLOGIA DA MADEIRA
DETERMINATION OF SOME PHYSICAL AND
MECHANICAL PROPERTIES OF
EUCALYPTUS GLUED LAMINATED TIMBER
(Scantling Eucalipto)
Requester : ScanCom do Brasil Ltda
CURITIBA
August – 2014
Version 1
80210-170 – Rua Lothário Meissner, 632 - Curitiba – Paraná. Fone (41) 3360-4313
Página 1/30
Curitiba, 19 de August de 2014.
Para:
Vinicius Lopes
Felype Rodrigues Moreira
Empresa ScanCom do Brasil Ltda
Prezados Senhores,
Em atenção a sua solicitação de realização de ensaios para avaliação de propriedades
de vigas laminadas coladas de eucalipto, encaminhamos proposta conforme acordado.
Esperando ter atendido suas expectativas, colocamo-nos a disposição para quaisquer
esclarecimentos adicionais que se façam necessários.
Atenciosamente,
Prof. Jorge Luis M. de Matos
Prof. José Guilherme Prata
UFPR - LTM
Página 2/30
CONTENTS
PART 1 – TEST REPORT. .......................................................................................................... 3
1. PRODUCT DESCRIPTION: ...................................................................................................... 3
2. TEST METHODS: ..................................................................................................................... 3
2.1. BENDING STRENGTH ......................................................................................................... 3
2.1.1. Determination of Local Modulus of Elasticity in Bending: ................................................... 3
2.1.2. Determination of Bending Strength ..................................................................................... 3
2.1.3. Bending Strength – Data Procedures and Test Arrangement ........................................... 4
2.1.4. Bending Tests: Equipment Description ............................................................................... 5
2.1.5. Bending Strength: Expression of Results............................................................................ 5
2.1.5.1. Local Modulus of Elasticity in Bending............................................................................. 5
2.1.5.2. Bending Strength.............................................................................................................. 5
2.2. COMPRESSION PARALLEL TO THE GRAIN ...................................................................... 6
2.2.1. Determination of Modulus of Elasticity in Compression Parallel to the Grain:.................... 6
2.2.2. Compression Parallel to the Grain – Data Procedures and Test Arrangement .................. 7
2.2.3. Compression Parallel to the Grain Test: Equipment Description........................................ 7
2.2.4. Compression Parallel to the Grain: Expression of Results ................................................. 8
2.2.4.1. Modulus of Elasticity in Compression .............................................................................. 8
2.3. SHEAR TEST OF GLUE LINES ............................................................................................ 9
2.3.1. Determination of Glue Lines Shear Strength ...................................................................... 9
2.3.2. Shear Test of Glue Lines: Test arrangement ...................................................................... 9
2.3.3. Shear Test of Glue Lines: Equipment Description ............................................................ 10
2.3.4. Shear Test of Glue Lines: Expression of Results ............................................................. 10
2.4. TENSION STRENGTH IN LAMINATIONS WITH FINGER JOINTS.................................... 11
2.4.1. Determination of Tension Strength in Laminations With Finger Joints ............................ 11
2.4.2. Tension Strength in Laminations With Finger Joints: Test Arrangement.......................... 11
2.4.3. Tension Strength in Laminations With Finger Joints: Equipment Description .................. 12
2.4.4. Tension Strength in Laminations With Finger Joints: Expression of Results.................... 12
3. NORMATIVE REFERENCES : ............................................................................................... 13
3.1. Symbols and abbreviations used ......................................................................................... 14
PART 2 – TEST RESULTS......................................................................................................... 15
1. Test Results............................................................................................................................. 16
1.1. Bending Strength :................................................................................................................ 16
1.2. Compression Parallel to the Grain: ...................................................................................... 17
1.3. Shear Test of Glue Line ....................................................................................................... 19
1.4. Tension Strength in Laminations With Finger Joints............................................................ 21
I
PART 3 – DISCUSSION OF THE OBTAINED RESULTS ......................................................... 22
1. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS ....................................................................................................... 22
1.1. Modulus of Elasticity in Bending .......................................................................................... 22
1.1.1. Statistical Tables .............................................................................................................. 22
1.1.2. Interpreting the Results of Statistical Analyses ................................................................. 23
1.2. Bending Strength.................................................................................................................. 24
1.3. Modulus of Elasticity in Compression Parallel to the Grain ................................................. 26
1.4. Shear test of Glue Lines....................................................................................................... 27
1.4.1. Statistical Tables ............................................................................................................... 27
1.5. Tension Strength in Laminations With Finger Joints............................................................ 28
1.5.1. Statistical Tables ............................................................................................................... 28
1.6. REFERENCE VALUES ........................................................................................................ 29
1.7. GENERAL REMARKS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .......................................................... 30
TABLES
Table 1 – Individual Test Sample Values: Density, Modulus of Elasticity and Bending Strength,
from Eucalyptus grandis Glued Laminated Timber, of Different Structural Compositions. .... 15
Table 2 – Individual Test Sample Values: Density and Modulus of Elasticity to the Compression
Parallel to the Grain, from Eucalyptus grandis Glued Laminated Timber, of Different
Structural Compositions .......................................................................................................... 17
Table 3 – Individual Test Sample Values: Shear Strength of Glue Line, from Eucalyptus grandis
Glued Laminated Timber, of Different Structural Compositions ............................................. 19
Table 4 – Individual Test Sample Values: Tension Strength in Laminations With Finger Joints
Line, from Eucalyptus grandis Glued Laminated Timber, of Different Structural Compositions
................................................................................................................................................ 21
Table 5 - Reference Values in Static Bending Tests of Glued Laminated Beams from
Eucalyptus grandis, Produced by Scancom and Beams Produced in Europe. (Used Standard
EN408) .................................................................................................................................... 29
FIGURES
Figure 1. Test arrangement for measuring local modulus of elasticity in bending ........................ 4
Figure 2. Test arrangement for compression parallel to the grain ................................................ 6
Figure 3. Test arrangement for determination of glue lines shear strength ................................ 10
Figure 4. Test arrangement for tension strength in laminations with finger joints....................... 12
II
DETERMINATION OF SOME PHYSICAL AND
MECHANICAL PROPERTIES OF
EUCALYPTUS GLUED LAMINATED TIMBER
(Scantling Eucalipto)
PART 1 – TEST REPORT
1. PRODUCT DESCRIPTION:
Company:
Product:
Width:
Depth:
Length:
Adhesive:
Species:
No. Test Pieces:
ScanCom do Brasil Ltda
Glued Laminated Timber
Scantling Eucalipto
65mm
65mm and 95mm
2000mm
EPI 1971 AkzoNobel
Eucalyptus grandis
25 glued laminated timber (Company sampling)
2. TEST METHODS:
2.1. BENDING STRENGTH
2.1.1. Determination of Local Modulus of Elasticity in Bending:
According Standard EN408:2003 – Section 9 – Page 7
2.1.2. Determination of Bending Strength
Figure 1. Test arrangement for measuring local modulus of elasticity in bending
Página 3/30
2.1.3. Bending Strength – Data Procedures and Test Arrangement
Test
1
2
3
4
5
Laminations
4
4
4
4
3
Composition
DKKD
DDKD
DDDD
KKKK
DKD
Width of cross
section – (b) – (mm)
65
65
65
65
65
Depth of cross
section – (h) – (mm)
95
95
95
95
65
Length of test piece
(L) – (mm)
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
600
600
600
600
500
475
475
475
475
350
Sample
Distance between
loading point and
nearest support – (a)
– (mm)
Gauge length - (l1) –
(mm)
Obs. D refers to a lamination without finger joints, K refers to a lamination with finger
joints
Standard: EN408: 2003 – Structural timber and glued laminated timber – Determination
of some physical and mechanical properties
Página 4/30
2.1.4. Bending Tests: Equipment Description
Equipment
Loading Machine
Digital
Extensometers
Digital Caliper
Rule
Model
Measuring
Limits
EMIC DL 30
EMIC
Mitutoyo
30 000 kg
12mm
150 mm
2.1.5. Bending Strength: Expression of Results
2.1.5.1. Local Modulus of Elasticity in Bending
 F2  F1 
16 I  w2  w1 
Em ,l  al12
2.1.5.2. Bending Strength
f m  aFmax
 2W 
of some physical and mechanical properties
Página 5/30
2.2. COMPRESSION PARALLEL TO THE GRAIN
2.2.1. Determination of Modulus of Elasticity in Compression Parallel to the
Grain:
Figure 2. Test arrangement for compression parallel to the grain
Página 6/30
2.2.2. Compression Parallel to the Grain – Data Procedures and Test
Arrangement
Test
1
2
3
4
5
Laminations
4
4
4
4
3
Composition
DKKD
DDKD
DDDD
KKKK
DKD
Width of cross
section – (b) – (mm)
65
65
65
65
65
Test piece length – (h) –
(mm)
360
360
360
360
360
260
260
260
260
260
Sample
Gauge length –
(l1) - (mm)
Obs. D refers to a lamination without finger joints; K refers to a lamination with finger
joints
of some physical and mechanical properties.
2.2.3. Compression Parallel to the Grain Test: Equipment Description
Equipment
Loading Machine
Digital
Extensometers
Digital Caliper
Rule
Model
Measuring
Limits
EMIC DL 30
EMIC
Mitutoyo
30 000 kg
12mm
150 mm
Página 7/30
2.2.4. Compression Parallel to the Grain: Expression of Results
2.2.4.1. Modulus of Elasticity in Compression
Ec ,0  l1  F2  F1 
A w2  w1 
of some physical and mechanical properties.
Página 8/30
2.3. SHEAR TEST OF GLUE LINES
2.3.1. Determination of Glue Lines Shear Strength
According ASTM D 905-03 – Standard Test Method for Strength Properties of
Adhesive Bonds in Shear by Compression Loading.
2.3.2. Shear Test of Glue Lines: Test arrangement
Group 1
Group 2
width – (b) – (mm)
50
50
Depth – (h) – (mm)
44
44
Test Sample
Figure 3. Test arrangement for determination of glue lines shear strength
Página 9/30
2.3.3. Shear Test of Glue Lines: Equipment Description
Digital Caliper
Rule
Equipment
Loading Machine
Model
Measuring
Limits
EMIC DL 30
Mitutoyo
3 000 kg
150 mm
2.3.4. Shear Test of Glue Lines: Expression of Results
 c  Fmax
Standard ASTM D 905-03 Section 11.
A
Página 10/30
2.4. TENSION STRENGTH IN LAMINATIONS WITH FINGER JOINTS
2.4.1. Determination of Tension Strength in Laminations With Finger Joints
According Standard ASTM D 4668-99 – Standard Test Method for Evaluating
Structural Adhesives for Finger Jointing Lumber.
2.4.2. Tension Strength in Laminations With Finger Joints: Test Arrangement
Figure 4. Test arrangement for tension strength in laminations with finger joints
Página 11/30
2.4.3. Tension Strength in Laminations With Finger Joints: Equipment
Description
Equipment
Loading Machine
Digital
Extensometers
Model
Measuring
Limits
EMIC DL 30
Mitutoyo
3 000 kg
150 mm
2.4.4. Tension Strength in Laminations With Finger Joints: Expression of
Results
 tension  Fmax
A
Página 12/30
3.
NORMATIVE REFERENCES:
EN408: 2003 – Structural timber and glued laminated timber – Determination of some
physical and mechanical properties.
EN14080:2013 – Timber structures – Glued laminated timber and glued solid timber –
Requirements
EN14080:2013 - Annex F: Bending tests with glued laminated timber, glued solid
timber and glulam with large finger joints (including compliance criteria)
EN14080:2013 - Annex E: Tests with laminations with or without finger joints (including
compliance criteria)
EN14358 :2006 – Timber structures – Calculation of characteristic 5-percentile values
and acceptance criteria for a sample.
EN 1194:1999 – Timber structures – Glued laminated timber – Strength classes and
determination of characteristic values
EN 386:2001 - Glued laminated timber - Performance requirements and minimum
production requirements
EN 1194:1999 - Timber structures - Glued laminated timber - Strength classes and
determination of characteristic values
INTERNATIONAL STANDARD ISO 8375: 2009 - Timber structures — Glued
laminated - timber — Test methods for determination of physical and mechanical
properties
ASTM D 905-03 – Standard Test Method for Strength Properties of Adhesive Bonds in
Shear by Compression Loading.
ASTM D 2559-04 – Standard Specification for Adhesives for Structural Laminated
Wood Products for Use Under Exterior (Wet Use) Exposure Conditions.
ASTM D 4668-99 – Standard Test Method for Evaluating Structural Adhesives for
Finger Jointing Lumber.
Página 13/30
3.1.
A
a
b
Ec,0
Em,l
F1
F2
fc,0
fm
Fmax
h
I
l
l1
W
w1
w2

cis
tension
Symbols and abbreviations used
cross-sectional area, in mm2
distance between a loading position and the nearest support in a bending test, in
(mm)
width of cross section in a bending test, or the smaller dimension of the cross
section, in (mm)
modulus of elasticity in compression parallel to the grain, in (N/mm2)
local modulus of elasticity in bending, in (N/mm2)
load, in newtons (N)
load, in newtons (N)
compressive strength parallel to the grain, in (N/mm2)
bending strength, in (N/mm2)
maximum load, in newtons (N)
depth of cross section in a bending test, or the larger dimension of the cross
section, in (mm)
second moment f area, in (mm4))
span in bending, or length of test piece between the testing machine grips in
compression, in (mm)
gauge length for the determination of modulus of elasticity, in (mm)
section modulus, in (mm3)
deformation, in (mm)
deformation, in (mm)
density in (kg/m3)
glue line shear strength, in (N/mm2)
tension strength in laminations with finger joint, in (N/mm2)
Página 14/30
PART 2 – TEST RESULTS
1. Test Results
1.1. Bending Strength :
Table 1 – Individual Test Sample Values: Density, Modulus of Elasticity and Bending
Strength, from Eucalyptus grandis Glued Laminated Timber, of Different
Structural Compositions.
Test
Sample
1-1
1-2
1-3
1-4
1-5
Composition
DKKD
DKKD
DKKD
DKKD
DKKD
MEAN =
C.V (%) =
2-1
2-2
2-3
2-4
2-5
DDKD
DDKD
DDKD
DDKD
DDKD
MEAN =
C.V (%) =
3-1
3-2
3-3
3-4
3-5
DDDD
DDDD
DDDD
DDDD
DDDD
MEAN =
C.V (%) =
Density

MOE
Em,l
Strength
fm
(kg/m3)
(N/mm2)
(N/mm2)
739
832
701
709
761
16363
16429
16476
17334
18534
79,3
83,8
67,6
82,7
84,2
748
7,0
17027
5,5
79,5
8,7
695
692
718
754
754
15739
15992
18746
15128
16287
48,1
77,7
80,6
81,4
83,0
723
4,2
16378
8,5
74,2
19,8
772
723
756
698
714
16764
21529
15204
15667
15855
71,3
87,1
79,7
70,7
83,4
733
4,2
17004
15,2
78,4
9,3
Página 15/30
Table 1 (cont.) – Individual Test Sample Values: Density, Modulus of Elasticity and
Bending Strength, from Eucalyptus grandis Glued Laminated Timber, of
Different Structural Compositions.
Test
Sample
4-1
4-2
4-3
4-4
4-5
Composition
KKKK
KKKK
KKKK
KKKK
KKKK
MEAN =
C.V (%) =
5-1
5-2
5-3
5-4
5-5
DKD
DKD
DKD
DKD
DKD
MEAN =
C.V (%) =
Density

MOE
Em,l
Strength
fm
(kg/m3)
(N/mm2)
(N/mm2)
720
753
754
728
695
18057
15576
16574
18737
12858
28,9
23,0
20,8
26,7
21,2
730
3,4
16360
14,2
24,1
14,7
622
732
638
737
725
17931
19177
17825
21293
17233
80,0
97,5
71,4
97,5
89,8
691
8,1
18692
8,6
87,2
13,0
Modulus of Elasticity
(E m, l ) (N/mm )
2
18500
17500
16500
15500
14500
13500
DKKD
DDKD
DDDD
KKKK
DKD
Composition
Graphic 1 - Mean Values of Modulus of Elasticity in Bending from Eucalyptus grandis
Glued Laminated Timber, of Different Structural Compositions.
Página 16/30
1.2. Compression Parallel to the Grain:
Table 2 – Individual Test Sample Values: Density and Modulus of Elasticity to the
Compression Parallel to the Grain, from Eucalyptus grandis Glued Laminated
Timber, of Different Structural Compositions.
Test
Sample
1-1
1-2
1-3
1-4
1-5
Composition
DKKD
DKKD
DKKD
DKKD
DKKD
MEAN =
C.V (%) =
2-1
2-2
2-3
2-4
2-5
DDKD
DDKD
DDKD
DDKD
DDKD
MEAN =
C.V (%) =
3-1
3-2
3-3
3-4
3-5
DDDD
DDDD
DDDD
DDDD
DDDD
MEAN =
C.V (%) =
Density

MOE
Ec,0
(Kg/m3)
(N/mm2)
768
906
762
783
791
21796
22627
19524
15848
19658
802
7,4
19891
13,2
722
817
798
758
806
18743
17926
18512
20371
22366
780
5,0
19584
9,2
811
825
764
759
22360
19109
27580
20800
790
4,2
22462
16,3
Página 17/30
Table 2 (cont.) – Individual Test Sample Values: Density and Modulus of Elasticity to
the Compression Parallel to the Grain, from Eucalyptus grandis Glued
Laminated Timber, of Different Structural Compositions.
Test
Sample
4-1
4-2
4-3
4-4
4-5
Composition
KKKK
KKKK
KKKK
KKKK
KKKK
MEAN =
C.V (%) =
5-1
5-2
5-3
5-4
5-5
DKD
DKD
DKD
DKD
DKD
MEAN =
C.V (%) =
Density

MOE
Ec,0
(Kg/m3)
(N/mm2)
777
779
824
799
764
18660
18665
19832
18201
18275
789
3,0
18727
3,5
700
815
686
773
803
22109
25289
20066
23716
19491
755
7,8
22134
11,0
Graphic 2 - Mean Values of Modulus of Elasticity in Compression Parallel to the Grain
from Eucalyptus grandis Glued Laminated Timber, of Different Structural Compositions.
Página 18/30
1.3. Shear Test of Glue Line
Table 3
– Individual Test Sample Values: Shear Strength of Glue Line, from
Eucalyptus grandis Glued Laminated Timber, of Different Structural
Compositions.
Test
Sample
Tension
Composition
Position
1-1
DKKD
Line 1
Line 2
1-2
DKKD
Line 1
Line 2
1-3
DKKD
Line 1
Line 2
1-4
DKKD
Line 1
Line 2
1-5
DKKD
Line 1
Line 2
MEAN
C.V (%)
2-1
DDKD
Line 1
Line 2
2-2
DDKD
Line 1
Line 2
2-3
DDKD
Line 1
Line 2
2-4
DDKD
Line 1
Line 2
2-5
cis
(N/mm2)
DDKD
Line 1
Line 2
MEAN
C.V (%)
10,01
12,70
13,01
10,31
3,74
9,43
6,11
13,13
12,90
8,25
9,96
32,18
3,47
10,60
12,38
10,01
11,94
13,40
11,90
11,17
9,17
7,78
10,18
28,21
Página 19/30
Table 3 (cont) – Individual Test Sample Values: Shear Strength of Glue Line, from
Eucalyptus grandis Glued Laminated Timber, of Different Structural
Compositions.
Test
Sample
3-1
Composition
DDDD
Position
Line 1
Line 2
3-2
DDDD
Line 1
Line 2
3-3
DDDD
Line 1
Line 2
3-4
DDDD
Line 1
Line 2
3-5
DDDD
Line 1
Line 2
MEAN
C.V (%)
4-1
KKKK
Line 1
Line 2
4-2
KKKK
Line 1
Line 2
4-3
KKKK
Line 1
Line 2
4-4
KKKK
Line 1
Line 2
4-5
KKKK
Line 1
Line 2
MEAN
C.V (%)
5-1
DKD
Line 1
Line 2
5-2
DKD
Line 1
Line 2
5-3
DKD
Line 1
Line 2
5-4
DKD
Line 1
Line 2
5-5
DKD
Line 1
Line 2
MEAN
C.V (%)
Tension
cis
(N/mm2)
8,31
12,45
9,84
13,43
10,04
10,74
6,19
9,97
10,24
10,13
20,81
11,76
9,89
9,85
11,01
12,37
9,37
8,76
4,55
9,52
13,15
10,02
23,87
9,34
11,52
12,46
11,73
11,27
10,98
9,57
10,92
11,30
5,22
10,43
19,73
Página 20/30
1.4. Tension Strength in Laminations With Finger Joints
Table 4 – Individual Test Sample Values: Tension Strength in Laminations With Finger
Joints Line, from Eucalyptus grandis Glued Laminated Timber, of Different
Structural Compositions.
GROUP 1
GROUP 2
Tension
Test
Sample
tension
Tension
Test
Sample
(N/mm2)
1-1
1-2
1-3
1-4
1-5
1-6
1-7
1-8
1-9
1-10
1-11
1-12
1-13
1-14
1-15
1-16
1-17
1-18
1-19
1-20
29,17
27,39
14,53
35,81
11,95
33,71
25,80
24,49
29,86
27,16
30,55
28,17
14,73
24,38
7,20
8,84
17,19
25,27
35,10
13,28
tension
(N/mm2)
2-1
2-2
2-3
2-4
2-5
2-6
2-7
2-8
2-9
2-10
2-11
2-12
2-13
2-14
2-15
2-16
2-17
2-18
2-19
2-20
35,66
24,59
25,38
26,35
26,29
17,75
18,09
38,61
23,89
24,90
28,30
26,54
33,20
26,90
43,87
39,43
39,53
39,53
30,49
40,02
MEAN
23,23
MEAN
30,47
C.V (%)
38,09
C.V (%)
25,35
Página 21/30
PART 3 – DISCUSSION OF THE OBTAINED RESULTS
1. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
To check the efficiency of the different laminations composition in the glulam beams,
statistical analyses from the values of mechanical properties were performed..
1.1.
Modulus of Elasticity in Bending
1.1.1. Statistical Tables
A - Analysis of Variance for MOE_Flex - Type III Sums of Squares
Source
Sum of Squares Df Mean Square F-Ratio
MAIN EFFECTS
A:Composition
1,8079E7
4
4,51975E6
1,29
RESIDUAL
6,99982E7
20 3,49991E6
TOTAL (CORRECTED)
8,80772E7
24
All F-ratios are based on the residual mean square error.
P-Value
0,3068
B - Table of Least Squares Means for MOE_Flex with 95,0% Confidence Intervals
Level
GRAND MEAN
Composition
DDDD
DDKD
DKD
DKKD
KKKK
Count
25
Mean
17092,3
5
5
5
5
5
17003,8
16378,4
18691,8
17027,2
16360,4
Stnd.
Error
Lower
Limit
Upper
Limit
836,649
836,649
836,649
836,649
836,649
15258,6
14633,2
16946,6
15282,0
14615,2
18749,0
18123,6
20437,0
18772,4
18105,6
C - Multiple Range Tests for MOE_Flex by Composition
Method: 95,0 percent Tukey HSD
Composicao Count LS Mean
KKKK
5
16360,4
DDKD
5
16378,4
DDDD
5
17003,8
DKKD
5
17027,2
DKD
5
18691,8
LS Sigma
836,649
836,649
836,649
836,649
836,649
Homogeneous Groups
X
X
X
X
X
Página 22/30
1.1.2. Interpreting the Results of Statistical Analyses
According the data in Tables A, B and C above, it is concluded that:

In different constructive compositions, average values of the modulus of
elasticity in bending did not differ statistically. We can consider that there was
no influence of laminations composition on the average of Modulus of Elasticity
of the glulam beams.
Página 23/30
1.2.
Bending Strength
D - Analysis of Variance for MOR_Flex - Type III Sums of Squares
Source
MAIN EFFECTS
A:Composition
12864,3
4
3216,07
34,98
RESIDUAL
1838,95
20 91,9476
TOTAL (CORRECTED)
14703,2
24
P-Value
0,0000
E - Table of Least Squares Means for MOR_Flex with 95,0% Confidence Intervals
Level
GRAND MEAN
Composition
DDDD
DDKD
DKD
DKKD
KKKK
Count
25
Mean
68,696
5
5
5
5
5
78,44
74,16
87,24
79,52
24,12
Stnd.
Error
Lower
Limit
Upper
Limit
4,2883
4,2883
4,2883
4,2883
4,2883
69,4947
65,2147
78,2947
70,5747
15,1747
87,3853
83,1053
96,1853
88,4653
33,0653
F - Multiple Range Tests for MOR_Flex by Composition
Composition Count LS Mean
KKKK
5
24,12
DDKD
5
74,16
DDDD
5
78,44
DKKD
5
79,52
DKD
5
87,24
LS Sigma Homogeneous Groups
4,2883
X
4,2883
X
4,2883
X
4,2883
X
4,2883
X
According the data in Tables D, E and F above, it is concluded that:

In different lamination compositions, the bending strength obtained for beams
whose composition is KKKK, showed the lowest mean value (24,12N/mm2).
Página 24/30

In the other constructive compositions, average values obtained did not differ
statistically. We can consider that there was no influence of lamination
composition on the average result of bending strength of those glulam beams.
Página 25/30
1.3.
Modulus of Elasticity in Compression Parallel to the Grain
G - Analysis of Variance for MOE_comp - Type III Sums of Squares
Source
MAIN EFFECTS
A:Composition
5,05258E7
4
1,26315E7
2,26
RESIDUAL
1,06253E8
19 5,59225E6
TOTAL (CORRECTED)
1,56779E8
23
P-Value
0,1009
H - Table of Least Squares Means for MOE_comp with 95,0% Confidence Intervals
Level
GRAND MEAN
Composition
DDDD
DDKD
DKD
DKKD
KKKK
Count
24
Mean
20559,5
4
5
5
5
5
22462,3
19583,6
22134,2
19890,6
18726,6
Stnd.
Error
Lower
Limit
Upper
Limit
1182,4
1057,57
1057,57
1057,57
1057,57
19987,5
17370,1
19920,7
17677,1
16513,1
24937,0
21797,1
24347,7
22104,1
20940,1
I - Multiple Range Tests for MOE_comp by Composition
KKKK
5
18726,6
DDKD
5
19583,6
DKKD
5
19890,6
DKD
5
22134,2
DDDD
4
22462,3
LS Sigma
1057,57
1057,57
1057,57
1057,57
1182,4
Homogeneous Groups
X
X
X
X
X
According the data in Tables G, H and I above, it is concluded that:

In different constructive compositions, average values of modulus of elasticity in
compression parallel to the grain did not differ statistically. We can consider that
there was no influence of lamination composition on the average result of
modulus of elasticity of the beams.

The overall average value of modulus of elasticity obtained in the 24 tested
samples in compression parallel to the grain was 20 559 N/mm2.
Página 26/30
1.4. Shear test of Glue Lines
J - Analysis of Variance for Shear - Type III Sums of Squares
Source
MAIN EFFECTS
A:Composition
1,32739
4
0,331848
0,05
RESIDUAL
291,837
44 6,63267
TOTAL
293,165
48
(CORRECTED)
P-Value
0,9951
K - Table of Least Squares Means for Shear with 95,0% Confidence Intervals
Level
GRAND
MEAN
Composition
DDKD
DKD
KKKK
DDDD
DKKD
Count
49
Mean
10,1459
10
10
10
9
10
10,182
10,431
10,023
10,1344
9,959
Stnd.
Error
Lower
Limit
Upper
Limit
0,814412
0,814412
0,814412
0,858466
0,814412
8,54066
8,78966
8,38166
8,40432
8,31766
11,8233
12,0723
11,6643
11,8646
11,6003
L - Multiple Range Tests for Shear by Composition
DKKD
10
9,959
KKKK
10
10,023
DDDD
9
10,1344
DDKD
10
10,182
DKD
10
10,431
LS Sigma
0,814412
0,814412
0,858466
0,814412
0,814412
Homogeneous Groups
X
X
X
X
X
According the data in Tables J, K and L above, it is concluded that:

In different constructive compositions, average values of the glue lines shear
strength did not differ statistically. We can be considered that the individual glue
line strength of the beams was not a factor influencing on the average results
obtained to the strength of the glulam beams.
Página 27/30
1.5.
Tension Strength in Laminations With Finger Joints
M - Analysis of Variance for Tension - Type III Sums of Squares
Source
MAIN EFFECTS
A:Group
523,742
1
523,742
7,60
RESIDUAL
2620,4
38 68,958
TOTAL
3144,15
39
(CORRECTED)
P-Value
0,0089
N - Table of Least Squares Means for Tension with 95,0% Confidence Intervals
Level
GRAND MEAN
Group
1
2
Count
40
Mean
26,8475
20
20
23,229
30,466
Stnd.
Error
Lower
Limit
Upper
Limit
1,85685
1,85685
19,47
26,707
26,988
34,225
O- Multiple Range Tests for Tension by Group
Group Count LS Mean LS Sigma Homogeneous Groups
1
20
23,229
1,85685 X
2
20
30,466
1,85685
X
Contrast Sig. Difference +/- Limits
1-2
*
-7,237
5,31604
* denotes a statistically significant difference.
According the data in Tables M, N and O above, it is concluded that:

Among the two groups of tested samples of laminations with finger joint, sent to
the laboratory for analysis, the mean value of tensile strength, obtained in
Group 2, had higher resistance.

The mean average of tension strength in laminations with finger joint, can be
considered high for the type of adhesive used and the test conditions in which
they were performed.
Página 28/30
1.6.
REFERENCE VALUES
Table 5
- Reference Values in Static Bending Tests of Glued Laminated
Beams from Eucalyptus grandis, Produced by Scancom and Beams
Produced in Europe. (Used Standard EN408)
Density

MOE
Em,l
Strength
fm
(Kg/m3)
(N/mm2)
(N/mm2)
DKKD
748
17027
79,5
DDKD
723
16378
74,2
DDDD
733
17004
78,4
KKKK
730
16360
24,1
DKD
691
18692
87,2
**E. grandis ´358´
565
12068
62,8
**É. grandis ´7´
535
11562
56,8
553
11601
55,9
725
17433
93,2
Material
** Glued Laminated Beams of Eucalyptus grandis clones produced in Italy. Dimensions: 2m
length, 80mm in width and height 115mm with 7 plates. Phenol Resorcinol Formaldehyde
Adhesive.
Página 29/30
1.7.
GENERAL REMARKS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on test results obtained it is concluded and recommended the following:

The laminated beams composed of 100% of lamination with finger joint,
constructive system KKKK, did not show good resistance to bending.
This can be attributed to factors such as:
o very short distance between joints
o presence of joints in tensile zone
o low tensile strength of the laminations with finger joints caused by
"fingers" with very short length, with lower structural patterns.

In beams with other building systems, higher average levels of resistance
to bending are achieved. This allows us to infer that beams without
laminations with finger joints, would be not necessary (class DDDD).

Laminated beams of Eucalyptus grandis produced by Scancom, exhibit
high density compared with glue laminated beams produced
experimentally, with clones of the same species in Europe. (Table 5 Reference Values)

The average values of modulus of elasticity and bending strength of
Scancom's beams are compatible and even higher when compared with
those values obtained with beams produced in Europe.
Página 30/30

Scancom Final Test Report

Transcription

Similar documents

CONSTRUTORA COBEC LTDA Quality Management System

Interna onal Conference for Improving the Learning of Biology and

FISH PASSAGES:

Geology of Paraná

Northern Paraná - Portal da Indústria

Northern Paraná

Hot Rods and American Muscle

Paraná Pine, Araucaria angustifolia: An Ancient

Apresentação do PowerPoint