Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!

Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!

  • Congratulations MintJulep on being selected by the Eng-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!

Bolting design for Multiply wood beam

Status
Not open for further replies.

dannyypk

Structural
Joined
Sep 29, 2004
Messages
26
Location
US
For thru bolt connection in wood beam, often come across situation for side loaded , multiply beam, either same species or different species.

I know in NDS 11.3.8 that connection for 4 or more ply , each shear plane shall be evaluated as a single shear connection.

In a lot of example, for flitch beam (steel plate sandwiched by wood beam), the transfer of shear using thru bolt can be treated as Double shear.

Say for a (4) ply LVL beam, side loaded, What is the capacity of the bolt shear? Should we look at the first ply as side member and other ply as main member ? or should we take each shear plane as single shear and use the minimum x 3?
 
dannyypk said:
In a lot of example, for flitch beam (steel plate sandwiched by wood beam), the transfer of shear using thru bolt can be treated as Double shear.

In these situations you're usually delivering the load to the plies either side of the flitch plate and the transferring load from there into the flitch plate. As such, you've got equally loaded wood plies trying to slide vertically past the steel plate and being prevented from doing so by the bolts. Definitely double shear. Let me know if you don't see it.

dannyypk said:
Say for a (4) ply LVL beam, side loaded, What is the capacity of the bolt shear? Should we look at the first ply as side member and other ply as main member ? or should we take each shear plane as single shear and use the minimum x 3?

I think that you look at the first ply as transferring 3/4 of the side applied load to the second ply (side and main memebers identical thickness). That's it.

I like to debate structural engineering theory -- a lot. If I challenge you on something, know that I'm doing so because I respect your opinion enough to either change it or adopt it.
 
You might find the attached file interesting. Please note the date on this is past its experation and I don't see it available on Strong-ties website anymore. So take this critically FWIW.

______________
MAP
 
 http://files.engineering.com/getfile.aspx?folder=355b15e8-289e-46d0-a14b-5a78f8aec6f9&file=T-SDSCREWAPPS05.pdf
2nd focuseng's post. Simpson has all the info.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Part and Inventory Search

Sponsor

Back
Top