Dissertação Philip - Steinhausen N.62971

Study of the Structural Behaviour of the
Connections between Mullions and

Transoms in Wood-Glass Facades
by Philip Steinhausen
Thesis to obtain the Master of Science Degree in
Integrated Master Degree (MSc) in Civil

Engineering
Examination Committee
Chairperson: Prof. Dr. Ana Paula Patrı́cio Teixeira Ferreira Pinto França de Santana
Supervisor: Prof. Dr. Luı́s Manuel Coelho Guerreiro
Member of the Committee: Prof. Dr. Augusto Martins Gomes
June 2013
Declaration of originality
I hereby declare that this master thesis on the subject: “Study of the Structural Behaviour
of the Connections between Mullions and Transoms in Wood-Glass Facades” is original
work which I alone have authored and written in my own words without the aid of third
parties. All passages that I have literally taken from the literature or from other sources,
such as websites, I have clearly marked as a quotation with an indication of the source.
Furthermore, I hereby agree that the University has the right to submit my work to the
Library and make copies for academic and research purposes.
Lisboa, 25th June 2013
Philip Steinhausen
I
Acknowledgements
I would like to express my very great appreciation to Prof. Dr.-Ing. Hans Joachim Blaß
and Dipl. Ing. Markus Enders-Comberg at the KIT and Dr.-Eng. Luis Guerreiro at the
IST, my research supervisors, for their valuable and constructive suggestions and support
during the planning and development of this work and for making my exchange semester
possible.
My special thanks are extended to Eva-Maria Senftleben and Rolf Rüsseler for their useful
critiques and recommendations on this project.
III
Abstract
Keywords: Beech, Connection, Facade, Glass, Glulam, Mortise, Mullion,

Structure, Tenon, Timber, Transom, Wood
This study analyses the structural behaviour of the connections between mullions and
transoms in beech glulam wood-glass facades. The use of beech wood in construction
can be a response to possible future bottlenecks in the supply of construction wood,
which might result from the forest conversion. Another advantage is that it is stiffer and
stronger than the usually used coniferous wood, in particular when having in mind the
weight of modern three-layered glazing. State-of-the-art CNC milling machines further
open up the possibility to link the wooden elements of such a facade through multiple
mortise-and-tenon joints.
Based on preliminary data, and an FE model, the author comes to the conclusion that
beech wood can in fact be used for these purposes. It was proven that, when subjected
to dead loads, the failure of these structures occurs perpendicularly to the fibre direction.
Tests to determine the transverse tension and transverse bending strength of beech glulam
revealed that, compared to spruce/fir glulam, the resistance of this still unconventional
construction material is considerable. The results of the FE model confirm these findings,
showing the stress peaks in the range of the transverse tension and transverse bending
strengths of beech glulam. Further, a design concept consisting of two equations which
can be used in future investigations, was formulated.
V
Resumo
Palavras-chave: Estrutura, Fachada, Faia, Ligação, Ligação macho- fêmea, Madeira,

Madeira lamelada colada, Montante, Travessa, Vidro
Neste trabalho é analisado o comportamento estrutural de ligações entre montantes e

travessas em madeira lamelada colada de faia em estruturas de suporte de fachadas de
vidro. O uso de madeira de faia na construção pode ser uma resposta a uma possı́vel es-
cassez no abastecimento de madeira para construção, resultante da converção das florestas
na Europa central. A faia é uma madeira mais rı́gida e mais resistente que as madeiras
resinosas normalmente usadas na construção o que pode constituir uma vantagem, es-
pecialmente quando se tem em mente o peso dos novos vidros de três camadas, cuja
utilização tem vindo a aumentar. Máquinas de fresagem CNC da última geração tornam
possı́vel executar estas ligações dos elementos de madeira através de encaixes múltiplos
do tipo macho-fêmea.
Com base em dados preliminares e nos resultados obtidos com um modelo de elementos
finitos, o autor chega à conclusão que a madeira de faia pode de facto ser utilizada para
estes fins. Foi comprovado que, quando sujeita ao peso-próprio (incluindo o peso dos
vidros), a ruptura destas estruturas ocorre perpendicularmente à direcção das fibras da
madeira. Ensaios para determinar a resistência da madeira lamelada colada de faia à
tracção e flexão perpendicular às fibras revelaram que, em comparação com a madeira
lamelada colada de espécies resinosas, a resistência deste material é muito superior. Os
resultados do modelo de elementos finitos confirmam os resultados, mostrando que os
picos de tensão à tracção e à flexão perpendicular às fibras obtidas se encontram na gama
das resistências para a madeira lamelada colada de faia. É também apresentado um
método para dimensionamento que permite de uma forma simplificada estimar as tensões
máximas.
VII
Index
1 Introduction 1
2 Structure of the thesis 2
3 Contextualisation 3
3.1 Current wood-glass facades . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3.2 Wood . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3.2.1 Beech wood . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.2.2 Glued laminated timber (Glulam) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.3 Forest management in the recent past and its implications . . . . . . . . . 5
3.4 Possible market for beech wood . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4 State of the art 7

4.1 Mullion-transom connection systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4.1.1 Plugged connection systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4.1.2 Slide-in connection systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4.1.3 Combined connection systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4.2 Loads . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
4.3 Preliminary tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
5 Tests 15
5.1 Material . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
5.1.1 Beech glulam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
5.1.2 Glue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
5.2 Transverse bending tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
5.2.1 Test set-up . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
5.3 Transverse tension tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
5.3.1 Test set-up . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
5.3.2 Screws . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
5.4 Test program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
5.5 Interpretation of the test results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
5.5.1 Glue tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
5.5.2 Transverse bending tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
5.5.3 Transverse tension tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
5.5.4 Observations that are applicable to both transverse bending and
tension tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
6 Finite element model 31

6.1 Model description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
6.1.1 Materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
6.1.2 Geometry and meshing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
6.1.3 Support conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
6.1.4 Loads . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
6.2 Results of the FE modelling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
7 Simplified model for stress assessment 39

7.1 Zone A (Transverse bending) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
7.2 Zone B (Transverse tension) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
7.3 Comparison of the FE and design concept results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
IX
8 Discussion of the research results 45
9 Outlook 46
References 47
Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
Cited Standards and General Technical Approvals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
Unpublished Documents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
Appendix A Statics A-1

A.1 Dead loads . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-1
A.1.1 Own weight of the transom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-1
A.1.2 Glass loads . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-1
A.2 Wind loads . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-2
A.3 Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-3
Appendix B Design resistance to dead loads A-5

B.1 W. Lang mullion-transom connection system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-5
B.2 Seufert-Niklaus Mullion-transom connection system . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-5
B.3 Knapp RICON mullion-transom connection system . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-6
B.4 RAICO mullion-transom connection system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-6
B.5 Hoffmann mullion-transom connection system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-6
Appendix C Preliminary test set-up A-7
Appendix D Orthotropy A-8
Appendix E Test results A-11
Appendix F APDL Source code A-24
List of Figures
1 Interior view of a wood-glass facade with mullion-transom structure (RUB-
NER Ingenieurholzbau S.p.A. 2013). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
2 Detail of the connection between mullion and transom of a wood-glass
facade with triple glazing (Schüco UK Limited, 2013). . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
3 Medullary rays in radial direction (Salomon, Walker, and Nelson, 2008). . . 4
4 Distribution of tree species in Germany (Second National Forest Inventory
2002 cit. in Federal Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Consumer Protec-
tion, 2011b, p. 6). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5 Examples of plugged-in connection systems. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
6 Plugged connection system. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
7 Examples of slide-in connection systems. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
8 Slide-in connection system. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
9 Locking clip (KNAPP GmbH, 2012a, p. 2). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
10 Examples of combined connection systems. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
11 Beech wood transom cross-section with multiple mortise-and-tenon con-
nection and aluminium profile to support the glass panes. . . . . . . . . . . 12
12 Details of a wood-glass facade. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
X
13 Failure pattern at the connection cross section of the tested transoms. . . . 14
14 Assembling process of the specimen (on the left is the beam, in the middle is
a specimen that is not glued (lsp = 295 mm) and on the right is a specimen
that had to be glued to have sufficient length). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
15 Transverse bending test set-up (all dimensions in mm). . . . . . . . . . . . 17
16 Transverse tension test set-up (all dimensions in mm). . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
17 Failure of specimen V1.3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
18 Failed section of specimen V9.11. Complete failure of the glue joint made
at the KIT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
19 Tapered specimen. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
20 Failed specimens that were submitted to tension. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
21 Examples of force-deflection diagrams of test series V2 and V3. . . . . . . . 27
22 Specimens that failed due to an imperfect glue joint. . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
23 Results from test series V1 displayed graphically. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
24 Elements oriented in the Cartesian coordinate system. The T shaped alu-
minium profile is represented by the gray elements and the wooden transom
by the brown elements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
25 Axial and hole bearing springs (all dimensions in mm). . . . . . . . . . . . 34
26 Force-deflection curves of the non-linear spring elements COMBIN39 (axial
springs in x direction and hole bearing springs in y and z direction). . . . . 34
27 Supports and symmetry conditions of the FE model. . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
28 Definition of four paths for data output. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
29 Stress distributions in the connection cross-section. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
30 Stresses in x direction (σx ). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
31 Stresses in y direction (σy ). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
32 Failure zones A, B and C. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
33 Simplifications for the estimations of σx in zone A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
34 The dashed bold line is the theoretical line according to the linear elastic
theory. The bold line is a possible linear distribution of the transverse
tensions and the red line is the admitted stress distribution. . . . . . . . . 41
35 Variation of the stresses in zones A and B. [Cont.] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
36 Transom cross-section. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-2
37 Wind introduction on trapezoidal surface for Hglass ≤ Bglass . . . . . . . . . A-3
38 Wind introduction on triangular surface for Hglass ≥ Bglass . . . . . . . . . . A-3
39 Test set-up of the preliminary tests. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-7
List of Tables
1 Section forces of the transom at the connection section due to wind and
dead load (calculated with γG = 1, 35 and γG = 1, 5). . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2 Design strengths (calculated with γM = 1, 3 and kmod = 0, 6). . . . . . . . . 12
3 Results of tests with multiple mortise-and-tenon joints. . . . . . . . . . . . 13
4 Experimental loads that were carried by different connection systems. . . . 14
5 Transverse tension (V4) and bending (V6) test results with different glues. 22
6 Transverse bending test results. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
7 Transverse tension test results. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
8 Configuration and results of run R0. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
9 Variation of Q. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
10 Variation of la . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
XI
11 Variation of bn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
12 Exterior pressure coefficients. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-2
13 Calculation of the section forces at the connection section of the transom. . A-4
14 Values of the compilance matrix (Neuhaus, 2009). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-9
15 Transverse bending test results of test series V6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-12
16 Transverse tension test results of test series V4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-12
17 Transverse bending test results of test series V1.1 to V1.5. . . . . . . . . . A-13
18 Transverse bending test results of test series V1.6.1 to V1.7.2. . . . . . . . A-13
19 Transverse bending test results of test series V1.8.1 to V1.9.2. . . . . . . . A-14
20 Transverse bending test results of test series V7, including test V1.1). . . . A-14
21 Transverse bending test results of test V9.1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-15
22 Transverse bending test results of test series V9.2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-15
23 Transverse bending test results of test series V9.3 and V9.4. . . . . . . . . A-15
24 Transverse bending test results of test series V9.5 and V9.16 (including test
V6.5). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-16
25 Transverse bending test results of test series V11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-17
26 Transverse tension test results of test series V2(the pre drilled holes were
not straight, to get ”good” results the tests were repeated in series V3). . . A-17
27 Transverse tension test results of test V3.1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-18
28 Transverse tension test results of test series V3.2 to V3.6. . . . . . . . . . . A-18
29 Transverse tension test results of test series V3.7 to V3.8 (These tests lef
was only 60 but lmeas was the same 135 as for the others). . . . . . . . . . A-18
30 Transverse tension test results of test series V2 and V3. . . . . . . . . . . . A-19
31 Transverse tension test results of test series V5 including test V3.2. . . . . A-20
32 Transverse tension test results of test series V8.1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-21
33 Transverse tension test results of test series V8.2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-21
34 Transverse tension test results of test series V8.3 to V8.4. . . . . . . . . . . A-21
35 Transverse tension test results of tests V8.5 V8.6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-22
36 Transverse tension test results of test series V8.8 to V8.16, including V8.5
and V4.5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-22
37 Transverse tension test results of tests V10.1 and V10.2. . . . . . . . . . . A-23
38 Transverse tension test results of tests V10.3 to V10.4. . . . . . . . . . . . A-23
List of Abbreviations
CNC Computerized Numerically Controlled

FE Finite Element
FEM Finite Element Method
Glulam Glued Laminated Timber
IDT Inductive Displacement Transducer
KIT Karlsruher Institut für Technologie - Holzbau und Baukonstruktionen
(Karlsruhe Institute of Technology - Timber Structures and Structural
Design)
RTO Research and Technology Organisations
SME Small and Medium Enterprises
ZIM Zentrales Innovationsprogramm Mittelstand (Central Innovation Pro-
gram for Small and Medium Enterprises)
XII
Nomenclature
Latin lower case letters
ag Distance between transom and glass pane

asp Distance between the load application point and the support of the four point
bending tests
b Width of the transom
bbeam Width of the beams that were used do produce the specimen
bn Depth of the slot
bsp Width of the specimen
bt Width of the tenon
eg Total eccentricity of the glass load
ey Edge spacing of the screws in y direction
ez Edge spacing of the screws in z direction
elx Element size in x direction
elx1 Element size in x direction (front part of the transom)
ely Element size in y direction
elz Element size in z direction
elzt Element size in z direction (tenons)
fm,90 Transverse bending strength
ft,90 Transverse tensile strength
h Height of the transom
hbeam Height of the beams that were used do produce the specimen
hn Height of the slot
hsp Height of the specimen
ht Height of the tenon
l Length of the transom
la Distance between the load application point and the support of the transom
(preliminary tests and FE model)
lbeam Length of the beams that were used do produce the specimen
lef Depth of engagement of the screws
lmeas Distance between the points that were used to measure the displacement (tips
of the two screws)(lmeas = lsp − 2 · lef )
lsp Length of the specimen
lt Depth of the tenon
py Screw spacing in y direction
pz Screw spacing in z direction
ssp Span of the four point bending tests
XIII
Latin upper case letters
A Failure zone: above of the first tenon

B Failure zone: in the inner edge of the slot
Bg Width of the glass pane
C Failure zone: below the first tenon
E Elasticity modulus
Em,90 Global elasticity modulus resulting of the transverse bending tests
F Force
G Shear modulus
Hg Height of the glass pane
Q Force per connection
Tg Torsional moment in the connection section due to the glass load
Vb Shear force in the connection section due to the own weight of the transom
Vg Shear force in the connection section due to the glass load
Vstress Stressed volume
Vwp Shear force in the connection section due to wind pressure
Vws Shear force in the connection section due to wind suction
Greek lower case letters
γD35 Volumetric weight of wood of strength class D35

γglass Volumetric weight of glass
δ Average deflection between the two used inductive displacement trans-
ducer or optical measurement devices (cameras)
ε Strain
ν Poisson’s ratio
φcore = dk Core diameter of a screw
φhole Diameter of a pre-drilled hole
φthread = d Thread diameter of a screw
σm,90 Transverse bending stress
σt,90 Transverse tensile stress
The additional subscript [d ] refers to a design value.

The additional subscript [av ] refers to an average value of a data series.
XIV
1 Introduction
As part of the Central Innovation Programme for Small and Medium Enterprises1 project
”Development of ideal configurations for connections between mullions, transoms and
profiles”, project partners from trade, industry and research aim to create the conditions
for the realization of beech glulam multiple mortise-and-tenon connections for the use in
high-performance wood-glass facades.
The objective of this study is to investigate the load bearing capacity of a beech glulam
transom with multiple mortise-and-tenon connections. The focus is on the strength of the
transom to tensions perpendicular to the grain and the corresponding failure mechanisms
that occur due to dead loads (glass loads and own weight), providing a basis for further
investigations. Figure 1 shows an example of wood-glass facades with a structure built of
mullions (vertical elements) and transoms (horizontal elements).
Figure 1: Interior view of a wood-glass facade with mullion-transom structure

(RUBNER Ingenieurholzbau S.p.A. 2013).
The expanding use of three-layer glazing, as shown in Figure 2, to improve the energy
efficiency of buildings and the resulting increasing masses of the window panes intensify
the risk of failure of the connections between mullions and transoms. This could make
the material wood competitive in comparison to alternative construction materials like
steel, even when having high impacts on the supporting structure.
So far, connections as used in traditional carpentry are relatively rare in wood-glass fa-
cades. Multiple mortise-and-tenon joints themselves are not an innovation but in the
last few decades it was more economical to use industrially produced connectors than
to hire specialised manpower with the skills to build complex and precise shapes out of
the wood. In the last years new technology became available, particularly Computerized
Numerically Controlled (CNC) milling machines, which are designed for that task.
1
“ZIM is a funding program for small and average sized enterprises (SME) with business operations
in Germany that want to develop new or significantly improve existing products, processes or technical
services. As the cooperation partner of an SME, public and private non-profit Research and Technology
Organisations (RTO) are also eligible.” (Federal Ministry of Economics and Technology, 2013)
1
Figure 2: Detail of the connection between mullion and transom of a wood-glass
facade with triple glazing (Schüco UK Limited, 2013).
2 Structure of the thesis
In Chapter 3, the reasons that led to the investigation of wood-glass facades will be pre-
sented. Further the construction material wood will be introduced. Until now, mainly
coniferous wood has been used in the construction industry. Having this in mind, infor-
mation to justify the choice of beech wood for the use in high-performance wood-glass
facades are provided.
In Chapter 4 information about the current state of the art mullion-transom connections
for wood structures will be given, followed by a short look at the loads and resulting
section forces in the connection section of a transom. Moreover it will be looked at a set
of preliminary tests with beech glulam multiple mortise-and-tenon joints that showed the
potential and weaknesses of this type of connection. The preliminary test results will be
compared to results of tests that were made with the state-of-the-art connection systems
at the Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT) prior to this study.
In Chapter 5 tests that were made to determine the bending and tension strength perpen-
dicular to the grain of beech glulam are described and analysed. These tests were made
in the sequence of the preliminary tests, with the objective of enabling a more detailed
look at the characteristics of beech glulam.
In Chapter 6 a tree-dimensional Finite Element (FE) model, which was built to aid
the interpretation of the obtained results, will be described and analysed. This model
also serves as a basis for a simplified design concept that is to estimate the tensions
perpendicular to the grain that occur for a given connection geometry (Chapter 7).
2
3 Contextualisation
3.1 Current wood-glass facades
A wood-glass facade is a mullion-transom structure. The vertical elements are called

mullions and the horizontal elements are the transoms. When this type of structure is
made of glulam, the original glulam beam, which has multiple layers along its height
is turned 90◦ around the beam axis to become a transom. This way the transom has
multiple layers along its width.
To improve the energy efficiency of buildings an increasing use of three-layer glazing can be
expected, leading to higher dead loads. These masses have to be carried by the structure,
forcing either the reduction of the glass dimensions or the use of stronger structural
materials like profiled steel. However, this solution is not always appropriate, as some
clients would choose wood for the structure.
Being the most viewable part of a building, the facade has special visual requirements.
Architects and owners pay special attention to this part of the building because it is seen
as representative for the content. Nowadays it is often requested to design facades as
transparent membranes. To achieve this transparency, the supporting structure of the
facade needs to be as thin as possible and big glass pane dimensions are preferred. This
would result in small cross-sections and big spans. Thus it could be interesting to use
more resistant wood species for wood-glass facades.
Due to the large size of the glass panes used and the resulting weight, the joints between
mullions and transoms can become a challenge. Extreme weather conditions like storms,
that seem to be occurring in shorter periods of time, increase this problem and can lead
to severe damages due to the interaction of varying loads, caused by wind pressure and
suction, and the continuous heavy weight of the glass panes.
3.2 Wood
There are many good reasons that speak for the naturally grown wood as a construction
material: aside from aesthetic reasons, it has an excellent ratio of strength/stiffness-to-
weight. Used properly, wood has a long lifetime (durability) and is unproblematic to
dispose of. Moreover, it is possible to be processed with very little energy expenditure
and, because of its CO2 neutral life cycle, it can be a means to cause a CO2 reduction
in the atmosphere: during its growth, a tree absorbs carbon through photosyntheses to
produce wood. When wood is burned or decomposed, the previously absorbed carbon
is liberated as CO2 . This means that if wood is used in such a way that it will not
decompose, it is a way to store carbon. One example is the use of wood for structural
purposes in the construction industry.
Wood is an anisotropic material in two ways: it has one anisotropy that derives from
the fact that the growth of wood cannot be controlled, resulting in unpredictable imper-
fections. This anisotropy is present in nearly every material, but the fact that wood is
naturally grown and not produced in a controlled environment, makes it much more sig-
nificant. Aside from this, wood has also a general orthotropy that is usually represented
3
in a Cylindrical (R, θ, Z components) coordinate system, where R is the radial, θ is the
tangential and Z is the longitudinal direction. In this coordinate system, the longitudi-
nal axis is parallel to the grain and the other two axes are perpendicular to the grain.
The longitudinal axis is sometimes called the strong axis, because the strength in fibre
direction is much higher than perpendicularly to them. To simplify the nomenclature,
in the following, stresses that occur perpendicularly to the grain are called as transverse
stresses.
Wood has also a different behaviour in tangential and in radial direction. One reason is
the presence of medullary rays that are oriented in radial direction (see Figure 3). As
they have a higher strength and stiffness than the surrounding wood, these rays work as
a reinforcement of the radial direction, meaning that wood is stronger in radial than in
tangential direction.
Medullary rays
Figure 3: Medullary rays in radial direction (Salomon, Walker, and Nelson, 2008).
3.2.1 Beech wood
Deciduous wood is currently used for construction wood only in a small percentage com-
pared to the annual amount of construction wood. This is justified by the significantly
higher price, which is caused by its slower growth and the resulting fewer supply. The
higher price also derives from higher processing costs and the fact that the general techni-
cal approval for beech glulam is relatively recent. Meanwhile, the slower growth leads to
a generally higher strength. The use of beech wood instead of spruce is only economically
profitable if this advantage of a higher strength can be exploited. This advantage could be
particularly interesting in the field of wood-glass facades as it might allow smaller cross-
sections without cutting back on the carrying capacity (compared to coniferous wood).
It might also allow the structure to sustain higher loads deriving from bigger spans or
heavier glass panes.
3.2.2 Glued laminated timber (Glulam)
As stated before, wood is a natural and heterogeneous material and its properties can
vary considerably, not only because of its general orthotropy but also because of many
possible damages and imperfections that occur due to the fact that it is a naturally grown
material. The need to homogenise the properties of wood leads to the production and use
4
of wooden composites. To homogenise its properties wood is divided and bond together
again by the addition of substances (such as synthetic resins) and/or through mechanical
means (screws, dowels, etc.).
There are many different of such wooden composites and each has an individual range
of applications. According to the Forest Products Laboratory (U.S.) (2010, pp. 11-17),
“Glulam is defined as a material that is made from suitably selected and prepared pieces
of wood either in a straight or curved form, with the grain of all pieces essentially parallel
to the longitudinal axis of the member. [...] Because the lumber is joined end to end,
edge to edge, and face to face, the size of glulam is limited only by the capabilities of
the manufacturing plant and the transportation system.” Glulam elements are commonly
used as beams with special structural requirements in the construction industry. As for
wood in general, glulam is mainly produced from softwoods, only a small amount of
glulam is produced from hardwood.
Due to the influence of the medullary rays, the probability of failure due to stresses in
tangential direction is higher than for stresses in radial direction. This means that the
more horizontal (parallel to the beam width) the orientation of the medullary rays of a
board in the final beam is, the higher the probability of failure in terms of transverse
bending and tension becomes.
3.3 Forest management in the recent past and its implications
In recent decades, the importance given to the forest conversion in Europe has grown. For-
est conversion consists in the regeneration of forests with site-adapted tree species, mostly
in a semi-natural way because of economical reasons. Nowadays approximately 73% of
German forests consist of mixed stands, as the Federal Ministry of Food, Agriculture and
Consumer Protection (2011b) says. The trends towards a sustainable and nature-oriented
forest management led to a strategy of transforming “the coniferous monocultures into
more stable deciduous ecosystems” (de Goede cit. in Nabuurs et al., 2003, p. 26).
According to the German Federal Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Consumer Protection
(2011a, p. 23):
“The course charted in forest management (...) has been towards extensifica-
tion, increasing stocks, extending the share of deciduous trees, natural regen-
eration and stiffer protective requirements. Compared with the large-scale pure
conifer stands, the growing proportion of mixed forests mitigates the existing
risks of climate and weather-driven change. One consequence is that the vol-
ume and types of coniferous wood needed by the timber industry will no longer
be available in the future on the same scale”.
It is further stated that:
“The expected rise in demand for coniferous wood, coupled with a decline in
the proportion of this type of wood in forests, could lead in the average and
long-term to bottlenecks and, by extension, to sawmills, timber companies and
pulp manufacturing plants moving elsewhere. This would pose a threat to jobs
and economic strength particularly in rural areas. In contrast, the proportion
of non-coniferous trees in the forest area has steadily risen in recent decades
and non-coniferous sawnwood stocks have increased considerably. Forestry cur-
rently exploits around half of this growth. For many types of non-coniferous
5
wood there are still not enough processing or utilisation options, innovative
technologies or future-centric sales markets with high value added.” (Federal
Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Consumer Protection, 2011a, p. 12)
It seems that the limits of sustainable use of coniferous wood are gradually being reached.
In central Europe deciduous wood is clearly underutilised and the forest conversion, re-
quired due to the climate change, is well underway, increasing the stocks of non-coniferous
trees. These facts result in an increasing amount of available deciduous wood and a de-
creasing production of coniferous wood. This way traditional markets are eliminated and
it is therefore necessary and important to develop new products for – and adapt existing
products to – this natural resource.
3.4 Possible market for beech wood
“In order to tap into the potential of non-coniferous wood, the timber, pulp
and paper industries are called on to develop further innovative and resource-
saving areas of use.” (Federal Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Consumer
Protection, 2011a, p. 13)
Being the largest segment of deciduous wood in Germany (see Figure 4) it is especially
interesting to investigate the potentials of beech wood. In this context, one field of use
could be the construction industry. The present thesis is to present a possibility for the
innovative use of beech wood in this market segment.
Figure 4: Distribution of tree species in Germany (Second National Forest Inven-

tory 2002 cit. in Federal Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Consumer
Protection, 2011b, p. 6).
6
4 State of the art
4.1 Mullion-transom connection systems
To give an overview of the existing connection systems between mullions and transoms
for wood-glass facades, five different mullion-transom connection systems were analysed.
In general, there are two different solutions for the connection between mullions and
transoms: plugged connections and slide-in connections. In addition to that there are
connection systems that merge the characteristics of both. In all the analysed connec-
tion systems the connection between mullions and transoms is made through connection
elements like bolts, dowels or screws. In contrast to that, multiple mortise-and-tenon
joints, which are plugged connections, can work without these connection elements. Only
a safety element to prevent the tenons from being pulled out of the mortises could be
necessary.
To simplify the analysis, in further considerations the transom will be observed as being
oriented in a Cartesian referential where the horizontal axis parallel to the wind loads is
the x-axis, the vertical axis is the y-axis and the z-axis is parallel to the transom axis (see
Figure 7b).
4.1.1 Plugged connection systems
The connection is made by plugging the transom into the mullion in the direction of
the transom axis. Examples of this type of connection systems are the Walter Lang
mullion-transom connection system, represented in Figure 5a, and the Seufert-Niklaus
mullion-transom connection system, represented in Figure 5b.
(a) Walter Lang mullion-transom connec- (b) Seufert-Niklaus mullion-transom con-

tion system (Z-9.1-688 2008). nection system (Z-9.1-658 2008).
Figure 5: Examples of plugged-in connection systems.
7
For this type of connection system, the first mullion is put into place and the corresponding
transoms are plugged into the mullion. After that the next mullion is plugged onto the
previously connected transoms and the next set of transoms is inserted, etc. (see Figure
6).
Figure 6: Plugged connection system.
The connection is made by tenons and/or wooden dowels and/or steel bolts. The tenons
are shaped out of the transom and plugged into the corresponding mortises, which are
milled into the mullions. The dowels/bolts are connected with the transoms and mullions
by being inserted into pre-drilled holes.
When the loads are perpendicular to the transom axis (wind loads, dead loads) the fol-
lowing stresses appear:
• The tenons, dowels and bolts are subjected to shear (for large tenons transverse
compression can also lead to local failure);
• The wooden parts are subjected to hole bearing, which creates transverse tension
(for the tenons, transverse compression can also lead to local failure).
To prevent displacements in the direction of the transom axis, different securing means
are applied, such as bolts that are inserted through the mullions, transoms and dowels.
Generally these securing means are only strained by accidental loads or at singularities,
like the corners of a building, where wind suction could pull the transom out of the
mullion.
With this type of connection no further securing means are required for wind loads. The
mounting of the structure has the inconvenience that the transoms must be supported
while the following mullion is fitted in.
The company Schindler Fenster & Fassaden GmbH suggests a modular concept where all
connections are plugged. In that case, each pre-fabricated module consists of two half
mullions and the corresponding transoms. When mounted, the two half mullions that
stand side by side are connected through the vertical profiles. Apart from being easy to
set up, with this solution it would even be possible to screw through the mullions in to
8
the grain side of the transoms to secure the transoms in the direction of their own axis.
These screws would be invisible to the user.
4.1.2 Slide-in connection systems
The connection is made by sliding the transom onto the two corresponding mullions
orthogonally to the transom and mullion axis. Examples of this type of connections
are Knapp RICON connectors, represented in Figure 7a, and RAICO mullion-transom
connectors, represented in Figure 7b.
(a) Knapp RICON connection system (b) RAICO mullion-transom connec-

(KNAPP GmbH, 2012b, p. 8). tion system (Z-9.1-621 2011).
Figure 7: Examples of slide-in connection systems.
For this type of connection system all the mullions are mounted, and then the correspond-
ing transoms are slid in, as shown in Figure 8.
Figure 8: Slide-in connection system.
The connection is established by means of two connecting elements: stainless steel plates
or aluminium profiles. One of these plates is screwed onto the grain side of the transom
9
and the other onto the mullion. The holes can be pre-drilled.
For loads perpendicular to the transom axis the following types of stress appear between
the wood components and the connector elements:
• The screws are subjected to shear;
• The connecting elements and the wood components are subjected to hole bearing,
which creates transverse tension.
For dead loads it comes to the following types of stress between the two connection
elements:
• The connection elements are subjected to bending and hole bearing, or the connect-
ing means (screws) are subjected to shear.
To absorb wind loads in and against the slide in direction, locking means must be installed
between the two connection elements such as locking clips (see Figure 9). These clips are
subjected to shear. When screws are used as a securing mean, they are pulled out or
sheared in the direction of the screw axis. Wind loads can also be absorbed by the
connecting means, which are sheared, while the connecting elements are subjected to hole
bearing stress.
Figure 9: Locking clip (KNAPP GmbH, 2012a, p. 2).
This type of connection is convenient because the transoms do not require any additional,
support during the assembly and can be slid into the already set up mullions. In addition,
no extra securing means are required for loads parallel to the transom axis. However,
special locking means are required for wind loads, resulting in relatively complex connector
configurations.
4.1.3 Combined connection systems
The Hoffmann mullions-transom connection system merges both connection types de-
scribed before. It either consists of wooden dowels which are inserted into pre-drilled
holes, as in Figure 10a, or of steel screws, as in Figure 10b. On the other hand the
Hoffmann-keys are slid into the mullions and transoms. The loads are transmitted in
similar ways to the ones described before. The convenience of this solution, specially the
one with screws is that no additional securing means are required. There is an aesthetic
disadvantage as the screw heads remain visible after completion. The solution with the
wooden dowels has the inconvenience of the plugged connection systems.
10
(a) Hoffmann mullions-transom connec- (b) Hoffmann mullions-transom connec-
tion system with Hoffmann-key and tion system with Hoffmann-key and
wooden dowels (Hoffmann GmbH, steel screw (Hoffmann GmbH, 2012,
2012, p. 18). p. 18).
Figure 10: Examples of combined connection systems.
4.2 Loads
Being a part of a facade, the transom is going to be affected by dead loads from its own
weight, glass loads and by wind pressure and suction.
To have a better view over different possible situations in practice, loads were calculated
for three different situations: a square sized glass pane and two rectangular sized panes,
one with Hg < Bg and another with Hg > Bg , where Hg is the glass height and Bg is the
glass width. The calculations are presented in Appendix A. Since the principal interest is
in studying the connection and its behaviour, only the resulting forces in the connection
section are calculated.
The forces are displayed in terms of their design value in Table 1: Vb and Vg are the
resulting forces of the dead loads (transom own weight and glass weight, respectively), Vwp
and Vws are the forces resulting from the wind loads (pressure and suction, respectively)
and Tg is the torsional moment that results from the eccentricity of the glass weight.
Table 1: Section forces of the transom at the connection section due to wind and
dead load (calculated with γG = 1, 35 and γG = 1, 5).
Bglass in mm 3000 3000 6000

Hglass in mm 3000 6000 3000
Vb,d in kN 0,136 0,136 0,271
Vg,d in kN 2,430 4,860 4,860
Tg,d in kNm 0,296 0,593 0,593
Vwp,d in kN 2,498 2,498 7,290
Vws,d in kN -3,713 -3,713 -10,935
When Hg = Bg mullions and transoms take the same wind loads. When Bg is increased
the wind loads transmitted to the transom increase and when Hg is increased, the wind
loads transmitted to the mullion increase. Since the loads of the transom have to be
11
transmitted to the mullions through the connection, it can be advantageous to avoid
glass sizes with Hg < Bg . This way the loads that have to be transmitted through the
connection would be decreased.
From here on only the glass loads(Vg and Tg ) are considered for further analysis. Nev-
ertheless, as can be seen in Table 1, the wind loads have a considerable effect on the
transom, specially when Hg < Bg . The effects of the wind loads should be included in
future studies.
The following Table 2 shows the design strengths of the 5 different connection systems
for a transom with a cross section of b · h = 200 · 50 mm2 . The strengths were calculated
according to the respective general technical approvals (see Appendix B). As can be seen,
the Walter Lang, Seuffert-Niklaus and Hoffmann connections would be too weak even for
a glass pane of 3 · 3 m2 . The Knapp and Raico connection systems would be too weak for
a glass size of 3 · 6 m2 .
Table 2: Design strengths (calculated with γM = 1, 3 and kmod = 0, 6).
Connection system Design strength for dead loads in kN

Walter Lang 2,256
Seufert-Niklaus 2,192
Knapp 4,243
RAICO 4,320
Hoffmann (wooden dowel) 0,934
4.3 Preliminary tests
Prior to this thesis, preliminary tests were conducted with mullion-transom structures
made of beech glulam that were connected through mortises and tenons (see Figure 11)
and secured in the direction of the transom axis with the aid of steel bolts. The transoms
had a cross-section of b · h = 200 · 50 mm2 and a length of l = 795 mm.
Glass load Holes for steel bolts
Screws
Figure 11: Beech wood transom cross-section with multiple mortise-and-tenon

connection and aluminium profile to support the glass panes.
12
The mortises and tenons had a width of bt = 40 mm and a height and depth of ht = lt = 10
mm. The transoms had a slot with a depth of bn = 5 mm and a height of hn = 10 mm
that supported an aluminium profile. Figure 12a shows an example of such a profile. The
profile, which was additionally secured with screws, received the glass loads at two points:
the glass supports. Figure 12a shows an example of such glass supports. As can be seen
in that figure, in practice, the glass supports are not punctual as considered for this study.
The dead loads were applied to a steel frame as a punctual load F and then transmitted
to the aluminium profile through the glass supports. The test set-up is represented in
Appendix C, Figure 39.
(a) Cross section of a transom with a slot and (b) Mullion-transom structure that illustrates
the corresponding aluminium profile. (Sta- the glass supports near the mullions (Sta-
balux GmbH, 2013). balux GmbH, 2013).
Figure 12: Details of a wood-glass facade.
The results are given in Table 3, where Q = F/2 is the load per connection (F is the
highest carried load). This means that Q can be directly compared to the reaction force
and strength of each connection. For all tests δ – the average deflection of both inductive
displacement transducers (see Figure39) – was less than 4 mm.
Table 3: Results of tests with multiple mortise-and-tenon joints.
Test F in kN Q = F/2 in kN
V1-1 25,70 12,85
V1-2 23,30 11,65
V1-3 25,20 12,60
V1-4 17,20 8,60
V1-5 19,00 9,50
Average 22,08 11,04
The results of the preliminary tests can be compared to tests that were made at the
KIT with each of the previously presented state-of-the-arts connection systems (see Table
4). These last mentioned tests were made with mullion-transom structures of spruce/fir
glulam, only the W. Lang connection system was tested with “solid” spruce/fir wood.
The test set-up was similar to the one mentioned before. The Hoffmann system was
13
only tested with wooden dowels, the Knapp system was tested with the RICON 160/40
connector including a reinforcement plate and the Raico system was tested with connector
Type 3 integral with two glass supports per connection.
The comparison between the tests of the state-of-the-art connection systems and the
multiple mortise-and-tenon joint can only be made within certain limitations because,
as is noted in the preceding paragraph and in Table 4, they were not obtained with the
same test configurations (different types of wood with different cross-sections and transom
lengths were tested).
Table 4: Experimental loads that were carried by different connection systems.
Experimental strength (dead loads)

Transom size Qav in δav in
Connection system
(h/b/l) in mm kN mm
Walter Lang 50/260/845 6,85 6,96
Seufert-Niklaus 50/160/845 7,93 5,41
Knapp 50/180/500 8,78 5,54
RAICO 50/260/850 11,43 8,82
Hoffmann 50/150/850 3,32 5,12
The beech glulam multiple mortise-and-tenon connection is stiffer than the other con-
nection systems. It can also be seen that the beech glulam connections had a very high
strength (only the RAICO system, which was tested with a wider transom, had a higher
strength).
The failure of the multiple mortise-and-tenon joints occurred perpendicularly to the grain,
more specifically in two regions: in front the first tenon (hereinafter called zone A) and
at the lower edge of the slot that supports the aluminium profile (hereinafter called zone
B). Figures 13a and 13b exemplify these types of failure. It seems that the failure in zone
A occurred as a transverse bending failure that came from the torsional moment which
was originated by the glass load. The failure in zone B was a transverse tension failure,
similar to the failure of a notched beam.
(a) Failure of specimen V1-2 in zone A. (b) Failure of specimen V1-1 in zone B.
Figure 13: Failure pattern at the connection cross section of the tested transoms.
14
5 Tests
The tests with the beech glulam multiple mortise-and-tenon joints were not representative
because of the limited number of tests that were made. Moreover an exact comparison
with the results of tests that were made with the state-of-the-art connection systems is
not possible. Nevertheless these results serve as a starting point for further investigations,
for they allow an overview of the strength of the different connection systems, specially
the potential of the beech glulam multiple mortise-and-tenon joint.
Since the failure occurs due to transverse tension and bending stresses, it was decided
to run tests to analyse the behaviour of beech glulam when subjected to those stresses.
Having in mind the results and specially the failure modes of the preliminary tests, two
different types of tests were made:
• Four point transverse bending tests, to determine the transverse bending strength
of beech glulam.
• Transverse tension tests, to determine the transverse tensile strength of beech glu-
lam.
If wood was homogeneous, the transverse tensile strength would be the same as the
transverse bending strength. As a matter of fact wood, as most materials, has small or
larger localized weaknesses that act to concentrate the stresses locally. When subjected to
bending only the extreme fibres are at the highest stress, controlling the flexural strength
of the entire specimen. If those fibres have no defects, the strength is higher. When the
same specimen is tensioned, all fibres are at the same stress and the failure occurs when
the weakest fibre reaches its limiting tensile stress. Consequently, it is common that the
tensile strength is lower than the flexural strengths. This fact leads to the necessity of
determining both transverse tensile and flexural strength for beech glulam.
5.1 Material
5.1.1 Beech glulam
The specimens were made from glulam beams that were available in the laboratory from
previous tests. This means that the tests had certain limitations in terms of specimen di-
mensions and number of possible tests. This way specimens with the dimensions proposed
by the governing standard (DIN EN 408 2012) could not be produced. Even though, the
dimensions of the produced specimens seem to be more adequate since the dimensions
are closer to those which are going to be used in practice for wood-glass facades.
The beech wood boards, with a layer thickness of 26 mm, were provided by the company
Pollmeier Massivholz GmbH & Co. KG. Generally, the orientation of the boards (in terms
of radial and tangential direction) in the final glulam beams can not be predicted, but
the selective cutting technique used by Pollmeier results in “boards with only horizontal
and semi-horizontal year rings” (Pollmeier Massivholz GmbH & Co. KG, 2013). This
makes it possible to predict a higher percentage of boards with the radial direction parallel
and semi-parallel to the beam height. This also means that the beam is more resistant
15
to stresses that are parallel to the beam height, than it would be without this cutting
technique.
The production of the glulam beams was made by the company Schaffitzel Holzindustrie
GmbH & Co. KG. Schaffitzel is a company specialized in glulam beams of great dimen-
sions, for which a layer thickness of up to 45 mm is allowed. Usually those beams are
made of coniferous wood (spruce/fir), but the company has already made some projects
with other, less used wood types. Even though, it is possible that the process for beech
wood is not finally tuned because of the little experience in the field of beech glulam with
relatively small dimensions.
There were available beams of strength class GL28h, GL32h, GL36h and GL40h. The
beams had a height (hbeam ) of approximately 200 mm, 250 mm and 300 mm and a width
(bbeam ) of approximately 36 mm and 50 mm. To obtain specimens with sufficient length,
for both tension and bending tests, the beams with a height of approximately 200 mm
and 250 mm had to be “doubled” by gluing together two samples of the same beam. The
specimens with a length of lsp = 300 mm were tested as they were (see Figure 14).
Figure 14: Assembling process of the specimen (on the left is the beam, in the
middle is a specimen that is not glued (lsp = 295 mm) and on the right
is a specimen that had to be glued to have sufficient length).
The beams were labelled in a way that they had one top and one bottom layer, labelled
o and labelled u respectively. This way each specimen had a top and a bottom layer
assigned. The “doubled” specimens were glued bottom to top, as shown in Figure 14.
For the analysis of the results, the layers of each specimen were numbered consecutively,
starting with Layer1 for the top layer, Layer2 for the next one and so forth. This way
the layers always had the same number, making it possible to compare the failure within
specimens that were made of the same beam.
16
5.1.2 Glue
Five different glues that were available were tested in order to choose one that could be
used to glue the samples of beech wood in a efficient and user friendly way:
• Terokal 221, that is a solvent-free, two-component, epoxy adhesive produced by

Henkel’s bonding and sealing brand Teroson.
• Loctite 9483, that is a general purpose, two-component, epoxy adhesive produced

by Henkel’s engineering adhesives and sealants brand Loctite.
• MC-Quicksolid, that is a solvent-free, two-component, polyurethane adhesive pro-

duced by the company MC.
• Macroplast UK8103, that is a general purpose, two-component, polyurethane adhe-

sive produced by the company Henkel
• Macroplast UR7225, that is a structural bonding, one-component, polyurethane

adhesive produced by the company Henkel.
5.2 Transverse bending tests
The four point transverse bending tests were made based on the directives described in
DIN EN 408 (2012), section 10 and 19. In these tests the deflections were measured
on the top of the specimens, in the center of the span, with the aid of two Inductive
Displacement Transducers (IDT) and a metal plate (see Figure 15).
Figure 15: Transverse bending test set-up (all dimensions in mm).
17
The stressed volume (Vstress ) was calculated by multiplying the cross-section area and the
distance between the two points where the loads are applied, because this is the volume
where the stresses are the highest. The loading speed was 0,7 kN/min.
5.2.1 Test set-up
The following dimensions were used:
• A span of ssp = 280 mm, with asp = 90 mm for all the specimens with lsp = 295
mm (bsp · hsp = 70 · 36 mm2 , 30 · 36 mm2 or 70 · 13 mm2 ).
• A span of ssp = 375 mm, with asp = 125 mm for all the specimens with lsp = 390
mm and lsp = 490 mm (bsp · hsp = 70 · 36 mm2 or 70 · 50 mm2 ).
5.3 Transverse tension tests
The transverse tension tests were made based on the directives described in DIN EN
408 (2012), section 16 and 17. The loads were applied aid of screws, instead of metal
Figure 16: Transverse tension test set-up (all dimensions in mm).
plates. The deflection was measured between the screw tips with the aid of two cameras
and a software that processes the optical input and calculates the deflection. The screws
18
(φcore = 6 mm and φthread = 8 mm) were screwed into pre-drilled holes (φhole = 6 mm)
which were drilled through the whole specimen to avoid a partial reduction of the cross-
section area. The stressed volume was calculated by multiplying the cross-section area
and the distance between the screw tips, because this is the volume where the stresses
are the highest. The loading speed was 3,0 kN/min.
5.3.1 Test set-up
The following dimensions were used:
• Length of the specimens lsp = 295 mm.
– There was made one test with a notched specimen. In this case the reduced
cross-section was 58, 5 · 36 mm2 .
– bsp · hsp = 70 · 36 mm2 or 36 · 36 mm2 .
– bsp · hsp = 70 · 36 mm2 or 70 · 50 mm2 .
– bsp · hsp = 70 · 36 mm2 or 70 · 50 mm2 .
The depth of engagement of the screws was lef = 80 mm except for the specimens with
cross section 36 · 36 mm2 . In this last case lef = 60 mm.
5.3.2 Screws
There were used screws with a core diameter of φcore = 6 mm and a thread diameter
φthread = 8 mm. It has to be noticed that the use of screws implies a stress peak in
the region of the screw tip, making this point a predetermined breaking point. Other
solutions, like gluing steel plates or wooden pieces to the ends of the specimens to apply
the tensile loads, have the same issue of causing stress peaks which, associated to a possible
imperfect gluing increase the problem. Another disadvantage of the latter solutions is that
the gluing process takes a lot of time (in the case of the use of metal plates) or that the
failure can also happen in the auxiliary wooden pieces. The only advantage of these
solutions is that the whole specimen can be subjected to similar tensile loads, while the
use of screws implies a “loss of length” equal to the depth of engagement of the screws.
5.4 Test program
According to Astrup et al. (2007),“the strength of wood is reduced when the stressed
volume is increased. The phenomenon is termed size effect and is often explained as
being stochastic meaning that the probability of weak locations occurring in the wood
increases with increased volume.” Weibull’s weakest link theory is a good theoretical
explanation of the phenomenon. The size effect is specially interesting for tensions that
19
occur perpendicular to the grain and it is included in Section in 6.4.3 of DIN EN 1995-1-1
(2010).
The main test series were made of specimens with strength class GL40h and cross section
of 70 · 36 mm2 .
To determine whether the size effect occurs for beech wood that is tensioned perpendic-
ularly to the grain, specimens with different cross-sections were tested. To determine
whether an influence of the strength class is observable, specimens of the other classes
were tested too. The following eleven test series were made:
V1: Five transverse bending tests with specimens with cross section 70·36 mm2 .
Four transverse bending test with specimens with cross section 30·36 mm2 .
Four transverse bending test with specimens with cross section 70·13 mm2 .
All specimens were made of beam GL40h 115 6 B.
V2: Five transverse tension tests with specimens with cross section 70·36 mm2 .
V3: One transverse tension test with a notched specimen with a reduced cross section
58,5·36 mm2 .
Five transverse tension tests with specimens with cross section 70·36 mm2 .
Two transverse tension tests with specimens with cross section 36·36 mm2 .
All specimens were made of two pieces of beam GL40h 120 4 B, glued together with
different glues.
V5: Four transverse tension tests with specimens with cross section 70·36 mm2 .
For the comparison of the results V3.2 was added. Specimens made of different beams
with hbeam = 300 mm.
All specimens were made of two pieces of beam GL40h 120 4 B, glued together with
different glues.
V7: Four transverse bending tests with specimens with cross section 70·36 mm2 .
For the comparison of the results V1.1 was added. Specimens made of different beams
with hbeam = 300 mm.
V8: Sixteen transverse tension tests with specimens with cross section 70·36 mm2 .
Specimens made of different beams with hbeam = 200 mm and hbeam = 250 mm.
Each specimen was made of two samples of the same beam.
For the comparison of the results V4.5 was added.
V9: Sixteen transverse bending tests with specimens with cross section 70·36 mm2 .
For the comparison of the results V6.5 was added.
20
Test series V1, V2 and V3 were made in order to determine the variation of the charac-
teristics within one beam/transom. Due to a not ideal test preparation of test series V2
(the holes in the specimens were not drilled straight), a third series V3 became necessary.
To determine the variation from beam/transom to beam/transom, two samples of every
available beam were taken to make a transverse tension test (series V5, V8 and V10) and
a transverse bending test (series V7, V9 and V11). Some tests from other test series were
added to the results of other test series because they were from beams that had already
been tested.
5.5 Interpretation of the test results
The following failure types were observed:
1. Wood in radial direction (parallel to the medullary rays);
2. Wood (no particularity);
3. KIT glue joint, that was made at the laboratory with the glues that were presented
before;
4. Glulam glue joint;
5. Near the screw tip, due to the occurring stress peak;
6. Wood imperfection.
All test results are in Appendix E. There, the different failure types are only mentioned
by the corresponding numbers described before.
Below, the tests are going to be analysed in groups, comparing first those made with
different glues, followed by the transverse bending tests and the transverse tension tests.
5.5.1 Glue tests
The glue Makroplast UR 7225 was chosen for the production of the subsequent specimens,
for it carried considerable loads in both the tension and the bending tests. Within the
tension test it had the highest strength. The other advantage of this adhesive is that
it is a one-component glue, making it easier to handle than the other ones. This last
21
Table 5: Transverse tension (V4) and bending (V6) test results with different glues.
Glue Test ft,90 in N/mm2 Test fm,90 in N/mm2

Terokal 221 V4.1 7,92 V6.1 12,12
Loctite 9483 V4.2 6,05 V6.2 13,02
MC-Quicksolid V4.3 7,81 V6.3 12,95
Macroplast UK8103 V4.4 7,31 V6.4 12,67
Macroplast UR7225 V4.5 8,79 V6.5 12,91
feature was decisive because the obtained strengths of the different glues are similar and
not representative, since only one test was made with each adhesive.
In further considerations the glulam is regarded as one material. This means that when
referring to the glue joints between glulam layers this will be explicitly mentioned. In all
other cases “glue joint” refers to the joint between two samples of the same beam, made
at the KIT.
5.5.2 Transverse bending tests
Within test series V1 it is interesting to observe that the failure always occurred in layer
5, except for the last tested specimen (V1.9.2), which failed in layer 7. For all of these
tests the failure occurred in radial direction, parallel to the medullary rays (see Figure
17). This means that the special cutting technique used by Pollmeier Massivholz GmbH &
Co. KG does in fact result in more resistant (in terms of transverse bending and tension)
beams/transoms. The fact that the failure occurs mostly in the same layer might lead to
the conclusion that layer 5 is a very weak layer. It has to be noticed here that the reason
for this repeated failure in the same layer can also be due to the orientation of this layer.
As can be seen in Figure 17a, the year rings of layer 5 are nearly parallel to the height
of the originating beam (hbeam ), meaning that the tensions occurred in the weakest (the
tangential) direction. The year ring orientation of layer 10 is similar to the one of layer
5 but this layer is in a region where, due to the test set-up, the stresses were not as high
as in layer 5. The results of test series V1, especially the tests with bsp · hsp = 70 · 13
mm2 , also show that within the same beam/transom, and even within the same layer,
there is a great dispersion of the strength (from 6, 60 N/mm2 to 13, 59 N/mm2 ) due to
the anisotropic structure of wood.
Regarding test series V9, it has to be mentioned that an error occurred during the pro-
duction of specimen V9.4: layers 1 to 8 were falsely made from beam GL36h 1 B instead
of GL36h 2 B. This means that, since the failure occurred in the part made from beam
GL36h 1 B, the only statement that can be made about the bending strength of beam
GL36h 2 B is that it is higher than the achieved 7, 72 N/mm2 .
The lowest strength, that occurred for specimen V9.11, can be explained with the com-
plete failure of the glue joint, possibly because the glue joint was not properly made. It
can be seen in Figure 18 that only a few wood fibres were pulled out of the left sample of
that specimen.
The low strength of specimen V9.5 can be explained by a crack in layer 8, that considerably
reduced the cross section area of the specimen. This failure is the same as for specimen
22
(a) Entire specimen that failed in layer 5.
(b) Detail of layer 5. Failure parallel to the (c) Failed cross section. The darker areas are
medullary rays (radial lines). the medullary rays.
Figure 17: Failure of specimen V1.3.
V8.5 (see Figure 20a), since both were made out of the same beam.
Table 6: Transverse bending test results.
hsp
bsp in Vstress fm,90,av in Strength
Test in
mm in mm3 N/mm2 class
mm
V1.1 to V1.5 70,00 36,00 252000 9,16 GL40h
V1.6.1 to V1.7.2 30,00 36,00 108000 8,73 GL40h
V1.8.1 to V1.9.2 70,00 13,00 91000 10,40 GL40h
V7.1 to V7.4 including V1.1 70,00 36,00 252000 10,84 GL40h
V9.1 70,00 36,00 315000 10,67 GL28h
V9.2 70,00 36,00 315000 9,47 GL32h
V9.3 and 9.4 70,00 36,00 315000 7,65 GL36h
V9.5 to V9.16 including V6.5 70,00 36,00 315000 9,56 GL40h
V11 70,00 50,00 437500 7,86 GL40h
It is difficult to make a statement about the size effect when analysing the transverse
bending tests that were made. When comparing the sub series of series V1 there seems
to be no influence of the size effect (for a stressed volume of 108000 mm3 , fm,90,av = 8, 73
N/mm2 and for Vstress = 252000 mm3 , fm,90,av = 9, 16 N/mm2 ). When comparing series
23
V7 (including V1.1) with the main series of V9 (including V6.5) and V11, the differences
in the values could be explained by the size effect, although these results can also have
happened due to the problems with the glue joints in series V9 and V11. Figure 22a
shows one of these failures due to an imperfect glue joint in specimen V9.15.
Figure 18: Failed section of specimen V9.11. Complete failure of the glue joint
made at the KIT.
5.5.3 Transverse tension tests
Within the transverse tension tests, the failure often occurred in the region of the screw
tip where the stress peak occurred (see Figure 20c). This means that, in those cases,
the measured strengths are lower than the ones that could have been obtained with an
optimized test set-up without stress peaks.
Figure 19: Tapered specimen.
24
(a) Failure of specimen V8.5 due to a crack (b) Failed section of specimen V5.2. Failure
(dark area) in layer 8. due to a knothole in a glulam glue joint.
(c) Failure of specimen V2.2 due to the stress peak at the screw tip.
Figure 20: Failed specimens that were submitted to tension.
Specimen V5.2 had a low strength because of a knothole in layer 5 (see Figure 20b), that
considerably reduced its cross section area.
The low strength of specimen V8.5 was explained before. It has the same reasons as the
low strength of specimen V9.5.
V3.1 was a tapered specimen (see Figure 19). The advantage of tapered specimens is
that the stress peaks at the screw tips are “evaded”. Since the deflection was measured
from screw tip to screw tip, those values can not be directly compared to the other tests
because the cross section area varies.
The testing of tapered specimens is a possibility that was not pursued further due to the
high effort of the production. In fact the “measured length” would have to be reduced
because of the partially varying cross section area. The fact that the specimens are not
tapered leads to conservative results because the section strength would be higher without
stress peaks at the screw tips.
As referred before, the pre-drilled holes of series V2 were not straight. This flaw had no
visible negative impact on the strength of the specimens when compared to test series V3.
This way the results of both test series were analysed together. In fact, when observed
separately, the average strength of series V2 is higher: ft,90,V 2 = 7, 07 N/mm2 , compared
to ft,90,V 3main = 5, 67 N/mm2 for the main series of V3.
Figures 21a and 21b, show the force-deflection curves of one test of series V2 and V3,
respectively. It can be observed that the effect of the not straight pre-drilled holes is a
pronounced differential deflection of the front- and backside of the specimen. In fact it can
25
be seen in Figure 21a that the backside (blue line) starts with negative deflections, which
lead to compressions. The front side (red line) starts with pronounced tensions. This be-
haviour can be explained with the tendency of the screws to become straight, introducing
a moment which causes tension on one side and compression on the other. Moreover, it
can be seen in both Figures that the average force deflection curve is approximately linear
and that the failure is sudden (brittle). This last observation was made in all other tests
and stands for both tension, as well as bending tests.
The results of the transverse tension tests indicate that the size effect is a phenomenon
that has to be taken into account for transverse tension in beech glulam. As for the
bending tests, test series with glued specimens have to be compared carefully to the
others, since the differences can also be due to the glue joint problems.
Table 7: Transverse tension test results.
fm,90,av
Vstress Strength
Test in
in mm3 class
N/mm2
V2.1 to V2.5 340200 7,07 GL40h
≈
V3.1 7,03 GL40h
284310
V3.2 to V3.6 340200 5,67 GL40h
V3.7 ans V3.8 226800 7,26 GL40h
V2.1 to V2.5 and V3.2 340200 6,37 GL40h
to V3.6
V5.1 to V5.4 including 340200 5,92 GL40h
V3.2
V8.1 579600 7,25 GL28h
V8.2 579600 6,02 GL32h
V8.3 and V8.4 579600 5,30 GL38h
V8.6 and V8.7 831600 4,71 GL40h
V8.8 to V8.16 incl. 579600 6,06 GL40h
V8.5 and V4.5
V10.1 and V10.2 1155000 4,60 GL40h
V10.3 to V10.5 805000 5,41 GL40h
26
(a) Force-deflection curve of test V2.3.
(b) Force-deflection curve of test V3.1.
Figure 21: Examples of force-deflection diagrams of test series V2 and V3.
27
5.5.4 Observations that are applicable to both transverse bending and ten-
sion tests
Series V8 and V9 give a little insight into the transverse bending strength of other strength
classes (see Table 6 and 7). But since there was only one test with GL28h and GL32h
respectively, and two for GL36h, it can only be said that it seems that the strength class
has no impact on the transverse bending strength of beech glulam.
When analysing the results of test series V8, V9, V10 and V11, it can be noticed that the
failure often happened because of a problem with the glue joint(see Figures 22a and 22b).
The glue itself does not seem to be the problem since, most of the times, the failure starts
in the glue joint and then propagates through the adjacent layers. This means that the
used adhesive is more resistant than the beech wood. It also means that the glue joint
was not made properly, this can be explained by the fact that the glue joints were “hand
made” and thus prone to errors. The failure occurs due to a defect, which causes stress
concentrations due to the notch effect, that is not present in the material that is going to
be used in practice. With proper glue joints, higher values may be achieved.
(a) Failed section of test V9.15 due to an (b) Failed section of test V8.3 due to an im-
imperfect glue joint. perfect glue joint.
Figure 22: Specimens that failed due to an imperfect glue joint.
The objective of this thesis was not to study the glulam glue joints. Nevertheless the
obtained results indicated problems with those glue joints. These problems might come
from the few experience with beech glulam, which is a relatively recent construction
material. This way it could be that the production process is not finally adapted for beech
glulam for the purposes of wood-glass facades yet. There are mainly two aspects that can
be a challenge: the glue itself (and the right handling of it in terms of quantity, hardening
time/temperature, etc.) and the pressing process. The used boards were thinner than
the usually processed ones and thus more flexible, meaning that the pressure application
points might have been spaced to far from each other, resulting in an inhomogeneous
pressure application.
28
(a) Force-deflection curves of the tests from series V1.
(b) Stress-strain curves of the test from series V1.
Figure 23: Results from test series V1 displayed graphically.
As explained before, the force-deflection curves were approximately linear for both the
tension and bending tests. Figure 23a emphasizes this fact, showing the results for all
the bending tests of series V1. This Figure also shows that, as can be expected, the
slope varies with the cross-section dimensions (black lines: bsp = 70 · 36 mm2 ; red lines:
29
bsp = 30 · 36 mm2 ;green lines: bsp = 70 · 13 mm2 ). Nevertheless, as can be seen on Figure
23b, the slope of the stress-strain curves is very similar, even with a high variation of the
maximum strength.
It is worth mentioning the limited representativity due to the reduced number of tests,
caused by not enough material being available. Even though, it is possible get a good
insight on the properties of beech glulam. For an extended practical use of beech wood
in the construction industry it might be necessary to amplify the range of tests to obtain
more representative values.
The values that are going to be used further on in this study are, the average values
of series V7 (transverse bending strength) and series V5 (transverse tension strength),
because the glue joints made at the KIT had no influence on the results. This way, for
strength class GL40h:
Transverse bending test series V7, for Vstress = 252000 mm3 :

fm,90,av = 10, 84 N/mm2
Em,90,av = 1305, 29 N/mm2
Transverse tension test series V5, for Vstress = 340200 mm3 :

ft,90,av = 5, 92 N/mm2
Et,90,av = 1254, 25 N/mm2
When comparing to the values given in the general technical approval for beech Glulam
(Z-9.1-679 2009):
ft,90,k = 0.5 N/mm2
E90,mean = 690 N/mm2
E90,05 = 550 N/mm2
It can be seen that the average traverse tension strength is ten times higher than the
one that is allowed according to the general technical approval. It is also worth a notice
that even the lowest transverse tension strength ft,90 = 2.20 N/mm2 , obtained for test
V8.5 which had a considerable imperfection, is four times higher. The average modulus of
elasticity that was measured in the tests is approximately twice as high as the one given
in Z-9.1-679 (2009).
30
6 Finite element model
The Finite Element Software ANSYS 13.0 was used to model a similar transom to the
ones that were tested in the preliminary tests. ANSYS uses the Finite Element Method
(FEM) to analyse the behaviour of structures subjected to a variety of loads. The software
predicts the structures0 reaction to the applied loads by approximation which is achieved
by dividing the structure in a finite number of elements. The behaviour of each element is
described by its governing equations. Since each element interacts with its neighbouring
elements, the resulting vast number of equations has to be solved simultaneously and in
dependence of each other.
6.1 Model description
The model built for this investigation was a simulation of a transom with multiple tenons,
as in Figure 24. It was a three-dimensional model because the focus was on a singularity,
the connection, where the behaviour can not be simplified. The glass load was applied to
a metal profile on two points, to simulate the effect of the two glass supports.
Figure 24: Elements oriented in the Cartesian coordinate system. The T shaped
aluminium profile is represented by the gray elements and the wooden
transom by the brown elements.
The profile had a T -shaped cross-section and was supported by a continuous slot in
the transom. The load was transmitted from the profile to the transom by screws and
31
through contact, leading to a local compression. Since the interaction between profile and
slot was similar to the behaviour of a notched beam, transverse tensions occurred. The
screws through both flanges of the profile transmitted forces through shear/hole bearing
and pulling out. To reduce the processing time of the simulation, the symmetry of the
problem was taken into account. This way, considering the symmetry conditions, only
half of the transom had to modelled. The fact that the transom to be studied was made of
glulam was not explicitly taken into account in the model, neglecting that in general the
glue joint should be more resistant than the wood. This was a conservative assumption.
6.1.1 Materials
The model was built with three materials: steel for the screws, aluminium for the profile
and beech wood for the transom.
Steel: Since steel it is an isotropic material, it is relatively simple to be modelled. The

following elastic characteristics were admitted in the model:
Modulus of elasticity: Esteel = 210000 MPa
Modulus of rigidity (Shear modulus): Gsteel = 81000 MPa
Poisson’s ratio: νsteel = 0, 3
Aluminium: Aluminium is an isotropic material as well. The following elastic charac-

teristics were admitted in the model:
Modulus of elasticity: Esteel = 70000 MPa
Modulus of rigidity (Shear modulus): Gsteel = 26000 MPa
Poisson’s ratio: νsteel = 0, 35
Wood: To simplify the model, the different behaviour of wood in radial and tangential
direction was not taken into account further on in this thesis. The built model admitted
an equal distribution of radially and tangentially oriented boards in the transom cross-
section. This way there were considered two main directions in the transom: parallel
to the grain and perpendicular to the grain. The longitudinal axis of the transom was
the longitudinal axis of every layer. The characteristics perpendicular to the grain were
defined as being the average value of the characteristics in radial and tangential direction.
This was possible because the characteristics in radial and tangential direction are similar
when compared to the characteristics in longitudinal direction, allowing to work with a
Cartesian (x, y, z components) instead of the Cylindrical coordinate system. The transom
in the model was oriented in a way that z was the longitudinal axis (parallel to the wood
fibres), and x and y axes were perpendicular to the wood fibre direction. To obtain values
compatible with the built model some transformations had to be made with the values
given by Neuhaus (2009). The transformations are explained in Appendix D and results
are given by Equations 1 to 6.
Exx = Eyy = 1720 N/mm2 (1)

Ezz = 14000 N/mm2 (2)
Gxy = 470 N/mm2 (3)
Gyz = Gzx = 1360 N/mm2 (4)
νxy = 0, 707 (5)
νxz = νyz = 0, 058 (6)
32
where:
Eii , is the Young’s (or elasticity) modulus along the i-axis;
Gij , is the shear modulus in the ij plane;
νij , is the Poisson’s ratio that corresponds to a contraction in j-direction when an extension
is applied in i-direction.
6.1.2 Geometry and meshing
To make the model compatible with the preliminary tests, the chosen dimensions for the
transom were: h = 50 mm (height in y direction), b = 200 mm (width in x direction) and
l = 400 mm (length in z direction). The tenon dimensions were: ht = 10 mm (height in
y direction), bt = 40 mm (width in x direction) and lt = 10 mm (depth in z direction).
The space between tenons and the edge distance in x direction bst = 20 mm. The tenon
spacing in y direction was 10 mm. The slot was modelled continuous through the whole
length of the transom, with a height of hn = 10 mm and a depth of bn = 5 mm. The
transom (including the tenons) and the metal profile were modelled with the element type
SOLID185. The screws had an effective length lef = 50 mm, a diameter d = φthread = 4, 5
mm and a core diameter dk = 3 mm. The spacing of the screws was pz = 50 mm and
the distance to the edge is ez > 50 mm in z direction. In y direction the screws were
distanced py = 30 mm, meaning that the edge distance is ey > 10 mm. The screws were
modelled with element type BEAM188, with a section radius of 1, 5 mm (φcore = 3 mm).
The size of the elements had to correlate with the dimensions of the screws, wood and
profile, in order to permit an adequate interaction.
The model was built with four different regular meshes: for positive z coordinates one
that was defined from x = 0 mm to x = 140 mm and another that was defined from
x = 140 mm to x = 205 mm. For negative z coordinates one that was defined from x = 0
mm to x = 140 mm and another that was defined from x = 140 mm to x = 205 mm (see
Figure 24). The first mesh had a discretization of (elx ; ely ; elz ) = (5mm; 5mm; 25mm),
the second had a discretization of (elx1 ; ely ; elz ) = (2, 5mm; 5mm; 25mm), the third had
a discretization of (elx ; ely ; elzt ) = (5mm; 5mm; 5mm) and the fourth had a discretization
of (elx1 ; ely ; elzt ) = (2, 5mm; 5mm; 5mm). This way the elements were oriented with the
fibre direction, improving the precision of the solution.
The interaction between wood and screws (hole bearing and pulling out) is modelled
through non-linear spring elements (see Figure 25) of the element type COMBIN39. It is
only possible to connect both, screws and transom, through these spring elements when
the mesh is regular because the nodes of the transom and the nodes of the connection
elements (screws) have to be coincident.
The force-deflection curves that were used for these springs are represented in Figure 26.
It has to be noticed that the presented force-deflection curves were determined for screws
with a diameter of φthread = 6 mm, this way the values were multiplied by the factor 4,5 6
to obtain adequate values. Moreover, the curves have to be multiplied by the element
length of the screws because the force is given in N/mm of screw length. The screws are
fixed to the profile, meaning that no differential movement is permitted at the fixed point.
To define the interaction between transom and profile the contact was modelled with the
element types CONTA173 and TARGE170.
33
Figure 25: Axial and hole bearing springs (all dimensions in mm).
Figure 26: Force-deflection curves of the non-linear spring elements COMBIN39

(axial springs in x direction and hole bearing springs in y and z direc-
tion).
6.1.3 Support conditions
In the tests the transoms were supported on each side by tenons that were slid into mortises
(the slide-in direction is parallel to the z-axis). In x and y direction the tenons were held
by the mortises. As a simplification, the mullions, and consequently the mortises, were
not modelled and their influence on the behaviour of the tenons was simplified by fixing
two lines of each tenon in x and y direction. The model ignored the effect of the friction
between mortises and tenons, putting no restrictions in z direction (see Figures 27b and
27a). To use the advantage of the symmetry of this model, only half of the transom (400
34
mm) was modelled and the nodes that were located on the plane of symmetry were fixed
in z direction (see Figure 27b).
(a) Connection cross section of the transom (all dimensions in mm).
(b) Section AA’: symmetry and support conditions (all dimensions in mm).
Figure 27: Supports and symmetry conditions of the FE model.
6.1.4 Loads
In general, it is common practice to support glass panes only at two points/regions (glass
supports), to have a defined static system. This was simulated by applying the force at a
point located la = 100 mm from the transom supports (tenons). The applied load for the
main run was the average load that was obtained from the preliminary tests with beech
glulam transoms was applied (Q = 11040 N).
6.2 Results of the FE modelling
The configuration of the main run (R0) and the maximal stresses in zone A and B are
summarized in Table 8. Zones A and B are those shown in Figure 13a, Figure 13b and
later in Figure 32 too. The dimensions were chosen for two reasons: the first is that the
processing time increases a lot when increasing the element size in only one direction,
not to mention the increase when decreasing the element size in all three directions. The
second reason is that the model is based on the linear elastic theory, according to which,
the stresses in singularities are infinite. In general, when decreasing the element size, the
35
solutions should be more precise. The analysed zones, A and B, are both such singularities
(comparable to the problem of the notched beam). This way, when decreasing the element
size it seems to be logical that the stresses in the singularities increase. In fact, when the
element size tends to zero the stress at a singularity should tend to infinite. Since every
material has a finite strength, the tensions can not be infinite. This way it makes no sense
to decrease the element size much, because the results would not be realistic. The chosen
dimensions resulted in stresses that seem to be realistic when compared to the results of
the preliminary and main tests that were analysed before.
Table 8: Configuration and results of run R0.
elx = ely in mm 5
elz in mm 25
elx1 in mm 2,5
elzt in mm 5
l in mm 400
Q in N 11040
bn in mm 5
la in mm 100
Zone A: (σx,max ) in N/mm2 11,13
Zone B: (σy,max ) in N/mm2 13,76
As can be seen the results are in the range of the results obtained from the transverse
bending and tension tests: σx,max = 11, 13 N/mm2 can be compared to the obtained
fm,90 = 10, 84 N/mm2 and σy,max = 13, 76 N/mm2 to ft,90 = 5, 92 N/mm2 . The stresses
in zone A and B are the highest transverse tensions in x and y direction, as can be seen
in Figures 29a and 29b respectively. This can be interpreted as a realistic result since it
is confirmed by the failure modes of the preliminary tests. One reason for the difference
in the values might a non-ideal element size and the fact that the the model is based
on the linear elastic theory, which is not an ideal explanation for singularities. Another
possibility is that the stressed volume of the tests is much higher than the one that would
be admitted in practice. This way, and admitting that the size effect has to be taken into
account for the occurred types of failure, the 11.04 kN that were applied to the FE model
would have occurred for higher localized stress peaks. A third possibility could be that
the average maximum load of the preliminary tests happened after a partial failure of the
transom. This would mean that the initial failure would have happened for lower loads
and that the stresses that this lower load would cause in the FE model would be lower
too.
For a more precise interpretation of the results, the stress distribution along the four paths
shown in Figure 28 are given in Figures 30a, 30b, 31a and 31b.
36
Path 2
Path 1
Path 4
Path 3
Figure 28: Definition of four paths for data output.
(a) Stresses in x direction (σx ) in the connection cross-section.
(b) Stresses in y direction (σy ) in the connection cross-section.
Figure 29: Stress distributions in the connection cross-section.
37
(a) Stresses in x direction (σx ) along Path 1. (b) Stresses in x direction (σx ) along Path 2.
Figure 30: Stresses in x direction (σx ).
(a) Stresses in y direction (σy ) along Path 3. (b) Stresses in y direction (σy ) along Path 4.
Figure 31: Stresses in y direction (σy ).
The x stress peak can clearly be seen in Figures 30a and 30b, as well as the y stress peak
in Figures 31a and 31b. It can be seen that the stress peak in y direction is not exactly
at the connection section.
The stress peaks in Figure 29 did not occur exactly on the paths that are shown in Figures
30 and 31. Nevertheless it is clear that the peaks occurred close to the peaks of the paths.
38
7 Simplified model for stress assessment
According to the preliminary tests and the main run of the FE model, zones A and B
seem to be the ones that limit the strength of the whole transom. With the objective
of formulating a design concept that enables the prediction of the stresses in zones A
and B, the FE model was run to show the variation of the stresses when varying three
parameters: the applied load (Q), the distance of the load application point to the support
(la ) and the slot depth (bn ). The observed stress peak zones are shown in Figure 32. In
the preliminary tests the transom did not fail in zone C but for la = 150 mm and la = 150
mm, the failure occurred in this zone.
Figure 32: Failure zones A, B and C.
It was observed that the variation of the stresses is proportional to the variation of Q.
Moreover it was observed that σy,max at zone B is inversely proportional to la and that
σx,max at Zone A is directly proportional to bn . It could not be observed a clear variation
tendency of σx,max at zone A with la and σy,max at zone B with bn . In this thesis,
the analyses of zone A and B is going to be made through equilibrium of the static
forces. Since the problematic of the two analysed zones are singularities that can be
compared to the problematic of notched beams, their behaviour could also be studied
and described through fracture mechanics. Fracture mechanics is a failure theory that
determines material failure by energy criteria, possibly in conjunction with strength (or
yield) criteria. It considers failure to be propagating throughout the structure rather than
simultaneous throughout the entire failure zone or surface.
7.1 Zone A (Transverse bending)
The load is applied to the profile and generates a moment in the profile due to the
eccentricity of the glass panes. Admitting that this torsional moment of the profile is
transmitted to the wood by the screws in a way that does not affect the stresses at zone
A or B, Q is transmitted from the profile to the transom by a contact pressure in the slot.
It is also admitted that the contact pressure is constant along bn and that the transom
cross section can be represented as a slender element that is supported at two points, as
in Figure 33a.
39
(a) Simplification of the cross section to a slender structure element.
(b) Sectional stresses in the transom.
Figure 33: Simplifications for the estimations of σx in zone A.
This way, the eccentricity of Q, that would be 0, 5 · bt + (bst − 0, 5 · bn ) generates a moment

that causes transverse tension at the top of the cross-section at zone A and transverse
compression at the bottom of the cross-section. The maximal moment MQ causes the
maximal transverse tension stresses in zone A. This moment is calculated by:
2 · bst + bt − bn
MQ = Q · (0, 5 · bt + bst − 0, 5 · bn ) = Q · (7)
2
Further it is admitted that the bending stress distribution due to the introduced moment
can be simplified as being rectangular and acting only at the top and bottom of the
cross-section (due to the tenons, which have to carry the horizontal loads), as in Figure
33b. It is also considered that in z direction the stresses are constant up to a point that
is located dz from the connection section. This way and knowing that for the tested
40
geometry (ht = h/5):
h h 4 · h2
MQ = σm,90 · · dz · (h − ) = σm,90 · dz · (8)
5 5 25
When matching both Expressions 7 and 8:
4 · h2 2 · bst + bt − bn 25 · Q · (2 · bst + bt − bn ) 1
σm,90 · dz · =Q· ⇔ σm,90 = · (9)
25 2 8 · h2 dz
If kA = 1/(dz ), then the transverse bending stress in zone A can be estimated by:
25 · Q · (2 · bst + bt − bn )
σm,90 = · kA (10)
8 · h2
To adapt the calculated values to the ones obtained in the modelling, a value of kA = 0, 012
mm-1 was chosen.
7.2 Zone B (Transverse tension)
Following the guideline of the just presented concept for the transverse bending stress, it
is admitted the load Q is carries by a transverse tension that is constant in both x and
z directions. In x direction, it is admitted that σt,90 is constant up to a point located dx
from the inner slot edge (see Figure 34).
Figure 34: The dashed bold line is the theoretical line according to the linear elastic
theory. The bold line is a possible linear distribution of the transverse
tensions and the red line is the admitted stress distribution.
41
In z direction, it is admitted that ft,90 is constant up to a point located cz · la from the
connection section. This way Q can be expressed as:
Q
Q = σt,90 · dx · cz · la ⇔ σt,90 = (11)
dx · cz · la
If kB = 1/(dx · cz ), then the transverse tension in zone B can be estimated by:
Q
σt,90 = · kB (12)
la
To adapt the calculated values to the ones obtained in the modelling, a value of kB = 0, 15
mm-1 was chosen.
7.3 Comparison of the FE and design concept results
The following tables (Tables 9, 10 and 11) and graphs (Figures 35a, 35b and 35c) show the
results of the different runs that were made with the FE model. In the tables σmax,F EM
are the maximum stresses at zone A or B obtained from the FE model and σcalc are the
stresses obtained through Equations 10 and 12. In the graphs of Figure 35, the solid lines
show the stresses that were obtained from the FE model while the dashed lines show the
stresses that the previously deduced expressions predict for kA = 0, 012 and kB = 0, 15.
The blue lines refer to zone A and the red lines refer to zone B.
Table 9: Variation of Q.
F in N 100 500 1000 5000 11040

σx,max,F EM (A) in N/mm2 0,10 0,50 1,01 5,04 11,13
σy,max,F EM (B) in N/mm2 0,13 0,63 1,25 6,25 13,76
σx,calc (A) in N/mm2 0,11 0,56 1,13 5,63 12,42
σy,calc (B) in N/mm2 0,15 0,75 1,50 7,50 16,56
Table 10: Variation of la .
la in mm 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200

σx,max,F EM (A) in N/mm2 10,20 10,49 10,83 11,13 11,40 11,67 11,94 12,19
σy,max,F EM (B) in N/mm2 38,68 27,88 19,56 13,76 10,52 8,64 8,73 8,70
σx,calc (A) in N/mm2 12,42 12,42 12,42 12,42 12,42 12,42 12,42 12,42
σy,calc (B) in N/mm2 66,24 33,12 22,08 16,56 13,25 11,04 9,46 8,28
It is noted that when la = 25 mm, the maximum σx occurs in zone B instead of zone A.
Also, the the maximum σy occures in zone C (below the first tenon) for la = 150 mm and
la = 175 mm . For la = 200 mm the the maximum σy occurs again at the inner edge of
the slot but in z direction it occurs at the load application point.
42
Table 11: Variation of bn .
bn in mm 2,5 5 7,5 10
σx,max,F EM (A) in N/mm2 12,53 11,13 10,56 9,77
σy,max,F EM (B) in N/mm2 12,53 13,76 11,06 12,81
σx,calc (A) in N/mm2 12,83 12,42 12,01 11,59
σy,calc (B) in N/mm2 16,56 16,56 16,56 16,56
It is mentioned that when bn = 10 mm, the maximum σx occurs in zone B instead of zone
A. This leads to the conclusion that the slot should not be to deep.
It also has to be mentioned that the obtained expressions only apply to the given geometry
and the range of the variations. The values that were given to kA and kB would result in
dz ≈ 83, 33 mm and dz · cz ≈ 6, 67 mm. It could be that these values occur due to other
geometrical factors that were not taken into account.
(a) Variation of the stresses in zones A and B when varying Q.
Figure 35: Variation of the stresses in zones A and B.
43
(b) Variation of the stresses in zones A and B when varying la .
(c) Variation of the stresses in zones A and B when varying bn .
Figure 35: Variation of the stresses in zones A and B. [Cont.]
44
8 Discussion of the research results
It was shown that beech wood is a material that could avoid bottlenecks in the supply
of construction wood, which might result from the forest conversion. In fact, beech wood
could even open new markets for wood since it is stronger and stiffer than the usually used
coniferous wood. In this context it could be a solution for the challenge that the increasing
use of three layered glazing posed to the design of wood-glass facades. The availability
of CNC milling machines opens up the possibility to establish the connection between
mullions and transoms through multiple mortise-and-tenon joints instead of relying on
other more or less complex specifically designed connection means. If the milling process
is relatively economical, a decrease of the global cost of the structure can be possible
due to the reduction, or even elimination, of additional connection means. The fact that
multiple mortise-and-tenon joints are plugged connections has the inconvenience that a
second mullion can only be mounted when the first and all of the corresponding transoms
are, which complicates its set-up. This could be avoided with pre-fabricated modular
elements.
The results of tests that were made prior to this thesis show that the use of beech glulam
mullion-transom structures with multiple mortise-and-tenon joints can be an alternative
to state of the art wood-glass facades. These tests also reveal that, when subjected
to dead loads, the failure of these structures occurs due to tension stresses that occur
perpendicularly to the fibre direction (transverse tension stresses). With those results in
mind there were made test to determine the transverse tension and transverse bending
strength of beech glulam. The results revealed that, compared to spruce/fir glulam,
considerable transverse tension and transverse bending loads can be carried by beech
glulam. In fact, the transverse tension and transverse bending strengths of spruce/fir are
often ignored for safety reasons. It seems that this would not be necessary for beech,
especially when used in wood-glass facades, due to the high visual requirements that
reduce the presence of imperfections (cracks, knotholes, etc.).
The FE model showed that there were stress peaks at the zones that failed in the prelimi-
nary tests. It could also be seen that, when applying the average load that were achieved
in the preliminary tests, the stress peaks were in the range of the transverse tension and
transverse bending strengths that were obtained in the previously mentioned tests. The
difference in the values could be explained by a non-ideal size of the finite elements and
the fact that the FE model is based on the linear elastic theory. Another reason could
be the size effect associated to the problem of the need to determine the stressed volume
in the affected singularities. It was observed that the variation of different parameters
caused variations of the stresses at the two prior identified failure zones. These variations
had clear tendencies that helped with the formulation a design concept for the connection.
The design concept consists of two equations (Equation 10 and 12) that were deduced
through the equilibrium of the forces in the transom. However, for each of the equations
a constant had to be defined to adapt the calculated values to the ones obtained from
the FE model. The values that were admitted for the constants might be explained by
geometrical parameters that were not taken into account in this study. Another approach
to the problem through fracture mechanics would result in similar expressions to the ones
obtained but in an improved explanation for the admitted values since it gives a better
explanation for the fracture behaviour. Nevertheless the equations serve to estimate the
stresses at zones A and B for the given geometry and the range of the variations.
45
9 Outlook
In further studies, the effects of the wind loads on the transom should be studied. With
those results it would be interesting to study the configuration and distribution of the
tenons in the connection section to optimize the resistance to the different acting loads.
For an extended practical use of beech wood in the construction industry it would be
necessary to amplify the number of transverse tension and bending tests to obtain more
representative values. These tests could also serve to give a more precise look at the
variation of the strength for varying stressed volumes (size effect).
The failure in zones A and B should additionally be analysed through fracture mechanics
to validate the presented design concept and, if possible explain the values of the constants
that were admitted.
Since the failure occurs due to transverse tension and wood is weakest perpendicular to
the fibres, one can think about a means to reinforce that direction, in particular in the
zones where the stress peaks occur. One option could be the use of longer screws to
secure the aluminium profiles. If those screws would be nearly as long as the transom is
wide, and had an unthreaded shank, the axial forces in the screws would be transmitted
to the less stressed part of the transom. The treadles shank would allow the profile and
the front part of the transom to be pulled against the back side of the beam, resulting
in compression of the front side. This way the front part could be considered as being
pre-stressed. This would have to be done for both the top and bottom screws to prevent
possible errors during the assembling process. Thus it would also be necessary to pay
attention to the peak compression at the bottom of the transom.
46
References
Bibliography
Astrup, Thomas, Christian Odin Clorius, Lars Damkilde, and Preben Hoffmeyer (2007).
“Size Effect Of Glulam Beams In Tension Perpendicular To Grain”. In: Wood Science
and Technology 41.4, pp. 361–372. issn: 0043-7719.
Federal Ministry of Economics and Technology (2013). Central Innovation Program SME
(ZIM). url: http://www.zim-bmwi.de/zim-overview (visited on 03/02/2013).
Federal Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Consumer Protection (Nov. 2011a). Forest
Strategy 2020. Sustainable Forest Management: An Opportunity and a Challenge for
Society. Governmental Report. Bonn (Germany): Federal Republic of Germany.
Federal Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Consumer Protection (Mar. 2011b). German
Forests. Nature and Economic Factor. Governmental Report. Berlin (Germany): Federal
Republic of Germany.
Forest Products Laboratory (U.S.) (2010). Wood handbook: Wood as an engineering ma-
terial. General Technical Report FPL-GTR-190. Agriculture handbook. Madison, WI:
U.S.: Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Forest Products Laboratory.
KNAPP GmbH (Feb. 2012a). RICON 60/40 Construction Manual. Company Document.
Euratsfeld (Austria).
Nabuurs, G. J., M. J. Schelhaas, A. Ouwehand, A. Pussinen, J. van Brusselen, E. Pesonen,
and A. Schuck (2003). Future wood supply from European forests. Implications for the
pulp and paper industry.
Neuhaus, H. (2009). Ingenieurholzbau. Teubner. isbn: 9783519152484.
Pollmeier Massivholz GmbH & Co. KG (2013). Frequently asked questions. url: http://
www.pollmeier.com/en/products/beech-timber/frequently-asked-questions/
(visited on 03/01/2013).
RUBNER Ingenieurholzbau S.p.A. (2013). Structural facades in wood and glass. url:
http://www.holzbau.rubner.com/images/content/458461_38659_3_C_429_327_
0_4286689/ru-holzbau-referenzen-holzfassade-005-430x330px.jpg (visited on
05/19/2013).
Salomon, O., M.R. Walker, and W. Nelson (2008). The Teacher’s Handbook of Slojd As
Practiced and Taught at Naas, Containing Explanations and Details of Each Exercise.
Kessinger Publishing. isbn: 9780548919927.
Schüco UK Limited (2013). Schüco Facade. url: http://www.schueco.com/web/uk/
architekten/fassaden/products/facades/aluminium/add- on_constructions/
11475222 (visited on 05/18/2013).
Stabalux GmbH (2013). Stabalux Holzsysteme Katalog. url: http : / / www . stabalux .
com/fileadmin/images/Stabalux_Holzkatalog.pdf (visited on 05/18/2013).
Weibull, W. (1939). A Statistical Theory of the Strength of Materials. Ingeniörsveten-
skapsakademiens handlingar. Stockholm (Sweden): Generalstabens litografiska anstalts
förlag.
Cited Standards and General Technical Approvals

DIN EN 1194 (1999). Norm DIN EN 1194. Timber structures — Glued laminated tim-
ber — Strength classes and determination of characteristic values. Brussels, Belgium:
Comité Européen de Normalisation (CEN).
47
DIN EN 1990 (2009). Norm DIN EN 1990. Eurocode 0: Basis of structural design. Brus-
sels, Belgium: Comité Européen de Normalisation (CEN).
DIN EN 1991-1-1 (2009). Norm DIN EN 1991-1-1. Eurocode 1: Actions on structures,
Part 1-1: Densities, self-weight, imposed loads for buildings. Brussels, Belgium: Comité
Européen de Normalisation (CEN).
DIN EN 1991-1-4 (2010). Norm DIN EN 1991-1-4. Eurocode 1: Actions on structures,
Part 1-4: General actions - Wind actions. Brussels, Belgium: Comité Européen de Nor-
malisation (CEN).
DIN EN 1995-1-1 (Dec. 2010). Norm DIN EN 1995-1-1. Eurocode 5: Design of timber
structures, Part 1-1: General - Common rules for buildings. Brussels, Belgium: Comité
Européen de Normalisation (CEN).
DIN EN 408 (2012). Norm DIN EN 408. Timber structures – Structural timber and
glued laminated timber – Determination of some physical and mechanical properties.
Brussels, Belgium: Comité Européen de Normalisation (CEN).
Z-9.1-436 (Aug. 2012). Allgemeine bauaufsichtliche Zulassung Z-9.1-436. Hoffmann Schwal-
ben als Holzverbindungsmittel. Berlin (Germany): Deutsches Institut für Bautechnik.
Z-9.1-589 (June 2009). Allgemeine bauaufsichtliche Zulassung Z-9.1-589. Verbinder RI-
CON als Holzverbindungsmittel. Berlin (Germany): Deutsches Institut für Bautechnik.
Z-9.1-621 (May 2011). Allgemeine bauaufsichtliche Zulassung Z-9.1-621. RAICO Pfosten-
Riegel-Verbinder für Holzfassaden. Berlin (Germany): Deutsches Institut für Bautech-
nik.
Z-9.1-658 (July 2008). Allgemeine bauaufsichtliche Zulassung Z-9.1-658. Pfosten-Riegel-
Verbindung für Holz-Glas-Fassaden. Berlin (Germany): Deutsches Institut für Bautech-
nik.
Z-9.1-679 (Oct. 2009). Allgemeine bauaufsichtliche Zulassung Z-9.1-679. BS-Holz aus
Buche und BS-Holz Buche-Hybridträger. Berlin (Germany): Deutsches Institut für
Bautechnik.
Z-9.1-688 (Nov. 2008). Allgemeine bauaufsichtliche Zulassung Z-9.1-688. Lang Posten-
Riegel-Verbindungen Holz-Glass-Fassaden. Berlin (Germany): Deutsches Institut für
Bautechnik.
Unpublished Documents
Hoffmann GmbH (2012). Katalog: Die Hoffmann-Schwalbe. Company Document. Bruchsal
(Germany).
KNAPP GmbH (Feb. 2012a). RICON 60/40 Construction Manual. Company Document.
Euratsfeld (Austria).
KNAPP GmbH (2012b). RICON Statik. Company Document. Euratsfeld (Austria).
48
Appendix A Statics
Worked example of a mullion-transom connection, considering the following fixed values:

Transom cross section b · h = 200 · 50 mm2 ;
Glass pane build-up t1 ; t2 ; t3 ; t4 ; t5 = 4; (4); 8; (4); 4 mm, where t2 and t4 are gas layers
between the glass panes.
Three different glass sizes: Hg · Bg = 3000 · 3000 mm2 , Hg · Bg = 6000 · 3000 mm2 ,
Hg · Bg = 3000 · 6000 mm2 .
A.1 Dead loads
The dead load that acts on the transom is defined by ist own weight and the glass load.
The own weight of the transom is a centred load, while the glass load is eccentric (see
Figure 36). This eccentricity results in a torsional moment along the transom axis.
A.1.1 Own weight of the transom
b = 200 mm, is the transom width;

h = 50 mm, is the transom height;
l = Bg , is the transom length;
Considering that beech wood is of strength class D35:
γD35 = 6700 N/m3 = 6700 · 10−9 N/mm3 , is the volumetric weight of wood of strength
class D35 according to Appendix A, Table A.3 of DIN EN 1991-1-1 (2009).
γD35 · h · b · l
Vb = = 0, 0335 · Bg N = 33, 5 · 10−6 · Bg kN (13)
2
A.1.2 Glass loads
The glass loads are applied to a metal profile on two points (glass supports) to have
a statically defined system. The loads are transmitted through contact from the metal
profile to the transom. This way it is a distributed load. Considering that:
t1 = t5 = 4 mm and t3 = 8 mm, are the thicknesses of the three glass layers of the used
triple glazing;
t3 = t4 = 4 mm, are the thicknesses of the gas layers between the glasses;
tg = t1 + t3 + t5 = 4 + 8 + 4 = 16 mm, is the total glass thickness;
ag = 10 mm, is the distance between transom and glass pane (eccentricity);
eg = b/2 + a + (t1 + t2 + t3 + t4 + t5 )/2 = 200
2
+ 10 + (4 + 8 + 4 + 4 + 4)/2 = 122 mm, is
the eccentricity of the glass load;
Hg , is the glass height;
Bg , is the glass width;
γglass = 25 kN/m3 = 25 · 10−6 N/mm3 , is the volumetric weight of glass according to DIN
EN 1991-1-1 (2009).
γg · tg · Hg · Bg
Vg = = 0, 0002 · Hg · Bg N = 0, 2 · 10−6 · Hg · Bg kN (14)
2
A-1
γg · tg · Hg · Bg · e
Tg = = 0, 0244 · Hg · Bg Nmm = 0, 0244 · Hg · Bg kNm (15)
2
Figure 36: Transom cross-section.
A.2 Wind loads
The wind loads are determined according to DIN EN 1991-1-4 (2010).

we = qp (ze ) · cpe in kN/m2
With:
we , is the wind pressure;
qp (ze ), is the peak pressure;
cpe , is the exterior pressure coefficient.
According to the national annex NA.B, Table NA.B.3, for a building height between 18m
and 25m, located in wind zone 2 (this means that it stands for the majority of Germany
excepting only the coastal regions), the peak pressure qp (z) = 0, 9 kN/m2 .
The maximum and minimum exterior pressure coefficient values for vertical walls of rect-
angular buildings according to DIN EN 1991-1-4 (2010) are represented in Table 12.
Table 12: Exterior pressure coefficients.
Wind suction (Zone A) Wind pressure (Zone D)

cpe,10 -1,20 0,80
cpe,1 -1,40 1,00
cpe,10 and cpe,1 are the values for a influence area of 10 m2 and 1 m2 , respectively. If the
influence area is greater than 10 m2 , cpe,10 is to be used, and if the influence area is less
A-2
than 1 m2 , cpe,1 is to be used. For influence areas between 10 m2 and 1 m2 , a linear
interpolation (see Equation 16 is to be made to obtain cpe .
(Awind − 1)
cpe,x = cpe,1 + (cpe,10 − cpe,1 ) · (16)
(10 − 1)
The wind introduction surface can have either have a triangular or a trapezoidal shape,
depending on the relationship between the height and width of the glass panes. If Hg ≥ Bg
then Awind = Bg2 and if Hg ≤ Bg then Awind = 2 · Bg · Hg − Hg2 .
Figure 37: Wind introduction on Figure 38: Wind introduction on

trapezoidal surface for triangular surface for
Hglass ≤ Bglass . Hglass ≥ Bglass .
For Hg = Bg = 3000 mm and Hg = 6000 mm ≥ Bg = 3000 mm, Awind = 9, 0 m2 . This

means that Cpe has to be obtained from a linear interpolation. For Hg = 3000 mm ≥
Bg = 6000 mm Awind = 27, 0 m2 , meaning that Cpe, 10 is going to be used in this case.
A.3 Results
For Hg ≥ Bg :
Bg l we · Bg · l
Vw = we · ·2· =
2 4 4
For Hg ≤ Bg :

we Hg Hg we · Hg · (2 · l − Hg )
Vw = · ·2· + l − Hg =
2 2 2 4
According to the DIN EN 1990 (2009) to obtain the design value for the loads, the perma-
nent loads are multiplied by γG = 1, 35 and the variable loads are multiplied by γQ = 1, 5.
A-3
The results for the different glass sizes are given in Table 13.
Table 13: Calculation of the section forces at the connection section of the transom.
Bglass [mm] 3000 3000 6000

Hglass [mm] 3000 6000 3000
Vb,d [kN] 0,136 0,136 0,271
Vg,d [kN] 2,430 4,860 4,860
Tg,d [kNm] 0,296 0,593 0,593
Awis [m2 ] 9,000 9,000 27,000
cpe,wp 1 1 0,800
we,wp [kN/m2 ] 0,7400 0,740 0,720
Vwp,d [kN] 2,498 2,498 7,290
cpe,ws -1,222 -1,222 -1,200
we,ws [kN/m2 ] -1,100 -1,100 -1,080
Vws,d [kN] -3,713 -3,713 -10,935
A-4
Appendix B Design resistance to dead loads
In this section the design resistance to dead loads for a spruce wood transom with a
cross-section of 50 · 200 mm2 are calculated according to the governing general technical
approvals.
B.1 W. Lang mullion-transom connection system
According to Z-9.1-688 (2008) the design resistance to a load parallel to the mullion axis
and perpendicular to the transom axis is defined trough Expression 17.
(1500 + 15 · HN ) · kmod
R45,d = kρ · in N (17)
γM
Where:
R45,d , is the design resistance to a load parallel to the mullion axis and perpendicular to
the transom axis;
ρk = 380 ≤ 500 kg/m3 , is the characteristic density of spruce/fir glulam of strength class
GL24h, according to DIN EN 1194 (1999);
kρ = ρk /350 = 380/350 = 1, 086;
kmod = 0, 6, is the modification coefficient according to DIN 1052:2004-08, Part 7.1.3 with
Annex F, Table F.1;
γM = 1, 3, is the safety coefficient for the resistances according to DIN 1052:2004-08, Part
5.4 with Table 1, when admitting a constant duration of the load and using class 1 or 2;
HN = 200 mm, is the transom width.
This way:
(1500 + 15 · 200) · 0, 6
R45,d = 1, 086 · = 2256 N = 2, 256 kN
1, 3
B.2 Seufert-Niklaus Mullion-transom connection system
According to Z-9.1-658 (2008) the design resistance to a load parallel to the mullion axis
and perpendicular to the transom axis is defined trough Expression 18:
(4750 · kRiegeltief e + 650 · kGlaslager ) · kmod
R45,d = in N (18)
γM
where:
R45,d , is the design resistance to a load parallel to the mullion axis and perpendicular to
the transom axis;
kRiegeltief e = min(1; b/140) = min(1; 200/140) = 1;
b = 200 mm, is the transom width;
kGlaslager = 0;
kmod = 0, 6, γM = 1, 3, as for Equation 17.
This way:
(4750 · 1 + 650 · 0) · 0, 6
R45,d = = 2192 N = 2, 192 kN
1, 3
A-5
B.3 Knapp RICON mullion-transom connection system
According to Z-9.1-589 (2009) the design resistance to a not centred load parallel to the
mullion axis and perpendicular to the transom axis is defined trough Expression 19:
p
Rla,d = kV P,d · ρk · kmod in kN (19)
where:
kV P,d = 0, 281, for RICON 160/40 with reinforcement plate;
kmod = 0, 6, ρk = 380, as for Equation 17.
This way: p
Rla,d = 0, 281 · 380 · 0, 6 = 4, 243 kN
B.4 RAICO mullion-transom connection system
According to Z-9.1-621 (2011) the design resistance to a not centred load parallel to the
mullion axis and perpendicular to the transom axis (Connector 177 Integral) is:
R45,d = 4320 N = 4, 320 kN (20)
B.5 Hoffmann mullion-transom connection system
According to Z-9.1-436 (2012) the characteristic resistance to a not centred load parallel
to the mullion axis and perpendicular to the transom axis is defined trough Expression
21 (for the variant with wooden dowels):
R45,k = 64 · b0,75 in N (21)
where:
b = 100mm, is the length of the Hoffmann (Schwalbe).
This way the design resistance is:
64 · 1000,75 · 0, 6
R45,d = = 934 N = 0, 934 kN
1, 3
A-6
Appendix C Preliminary test set-up
397,5 397,5
Section B-B
F F
4 A A
15
350
IDTL IDTR
IDTR
3
1 1 2
5
B
l b
5
Legend Section A-A
IDTL: Inductive displacement transducer (left)
IDTR: Inductive displacement transducer (right)
1: Post b
2: Beam
3: Metal profile with glass supports
4: Steel frame
5: Tension rods of steel
6: Guideway for the frame
6
Dimensions in mm
Figure 39: Test set-up of the preliminary tests.
A-7
Appendix D Orthotropy
Admitting that wood is an orthotropic linear elastic material, Hooke’s spring law for
continuous media (σij = Cij × εij ) is expressed in matrix form by Equation 24, where Cij
is the elastic stiffness matrix or stress-strain matrix.
x
σ1 = x + y σ2 = (22)
y
∂x + y ∂ xy
σ10 = σ20 = (23)
∂x ∂x
     
σ11 c11 c12 c13 0 0 0 ε11
σ  c
 22   21 c22 c23 0 0 0  ε22 
 
σ33  c31 c32 c33 0 0 0   ε33 
     
 = ×  (24)
σ23   0 0 0 c 44 0 0  2ε23 
     
σ   0 0 0 0 c 0  2ε 
 31   55   31 
σ12 0 0 0 0 0 c66 2ε12
where:
σij , is the stress that acts on a plane normal to the i-axis, j is the direction in which the
stress acts;
εij , is the strain on a plane normal to the i-axis, j is the direction of the strain.
The inverse of the stiffness matrix (C−1

ij = Sij ), called flexibility or compliance matrix is
is a symmetric matrix and is commonly written as:
− Eν21 − Eν31
   1 
s11 s12 s13 0 0 0 E11 22 33
0 0 0
 ν12 1 ν32
 − E11 E22 − E33 0
s
 21 s22 s23 0 0 0 0 0 
  ν13 ν23 1
s31 s32 s33 0 0 0  − E11 − E22 E33 0 0 0 
 
S= 
= 0
  1
 (25)
 0 0 0 s 44 0 0   0 0 G23
0 0 

0
 0 0 0 s55 0    0
 0 0 0 G131 0  
1
0 0 0 0 0 s66 0 0 0 0 0 G12
where:
Eii , is the Young’s (or elasticity) modulus along the i-axis;
Gij , is the shear modulus in the ij plane;
νij , is the Poisson’s ratio that corresponds to a contraction in j-direction when an extension
is applied in i-direction.
As a result, the inverted Hooke’s law for orthotropic materials (εij = Sij × σij ), can be
expressed in matrix form as:
− Eν21 − Eν31
   1  
ε11 E11 22 33
0 0 0 σ11
 ε  − ν12 1 ν32
 22   E11 E22 − E33 0 0 0  σ 
  22 
 ε33  − Eν13 − Eν23 1
0 0 0  σ33 
     
 =  11 22 E33 × 

2ε23   0 1 (26)
   0 0 G23
0 0  σ23 
  
2ε   0 1
 31   0 0 0 G31
0  σ 
  31 
1
2ε12 0 0 0 0 0 G12
σ12
A-8
According to Neuhaus (2009, p. 26), the values of the compilance matrix for beech wood
for a moisture content of approximately 12% are represented in Table 14. These values
are average values. Since the results of the tests/experiments are average values too they
can be compared.
Thus, wood properties are normally given in the cylindrical coordinate system, like the
values presented by Neuhaus (2009, p. 26), who indicates values for the elastic properties
of various type of wood, which were obtained from tests with specimens without major
imperfections and with a moisture content of 12%.
Table 14: Values of the compilance matrix (Neuhaus, 2009).
Beech wood
ρN in kg/m3 690
s11 in mm2 /N 1/1160
s22 in mm2 /N 1/14000
s33 in mm2 /N 1/2280
s44 in mm2 /N 1/1640
s55 in mm2 /N 1/470
s66 in mm2 /N 1/1080
s12 = s21 in mm2 /N −0, 037 · 10−3
s13 = s31 in mm2 /N −0, 31 · 10−3
s32 = s23 in mm2 /N −0, 032 · 10−3
This way the following variables can be determined:

1 1
E11 = = 1160 N/mm2 (27) G23 = = 1640 N/mm2 (30)
s11 s44
1 1
E22 = = 14000 N/mm2 (28) G31 = = 470 N/mm2 (31)
s22 s55
1 1
E33 = = 2280 N/mm2 (29) G12 = = 1080 N/mm2 (32)
s33 s66
Being an orthotropic material wood has different properties in all three principal direc-
tions: the longitudinal (L), the radial (R) and the tangential direction (T ).
Neuhaus (2009) defines that the direction 1 is the tangential (T ), 2 is the longitudinal
(L), and 3 the radial (R) direction. As a result the following equations can be written:
ERR = E33 (33) GT L = G12 (36)

ET T = E11 (34) GLR = G23 (37)
ELL = E22 (35) GRT = G31 (38)
A-9
sRT = sT R = s31 = s13 (39)
sRL = sLR = s32 = s23 (40)
sT L = sLT = s12 = s21 (41)
νT R = −ET T × sRT = −E11 × s31 (42) νRT = −ERR × sT R = −E33 × s13 (45)
νLR = −ELL × sRL = −E22 × s32 (43) νRL = −ERR × sLR = −E33 × s23 (46)
νLT = −ELL × sT L = −E22 × s12 (44) νT L = −ET T × sLT = −E22 × s21 (47)
In the built model the longitudinal direction corresponds to the z-axis. The characteristics
in radial and tangential direction are similar compared to the characteristics in longitu-
dinal direction. Being a glued laminated timber transom, in general it is not possible to
know what orientation the planks/boards are going to have in the transom, thus it is go-
ing to be admitted that the wood characteristics are the same in radial and in tangential
direction (defined by the average value of the radial and tangential values).
To build the model in a Cartesian (x, y, z components) Coordinate System, z is still the
longitudinal axis (parallel to the wood fibres), but and x and y (perpendicular to the
wood fibre direction).
Ansys requests values for some specific variables. The fibre direction (longitudinal) will
always be parallel to the z-axis. It is not possible to say that the radial and tangential
directions of the wood are always parallel to x and y-axis. In the other two directions will
be defined as the average of the radial and tangential values.
ez = Ezz = ELL = E22 = 14000 N/mm2

(48)
gxy = Gxy = GRT = G31 = 470 N/mm2
(49)
ERR + ET T E33 + E11 2280 + 1160
ex = ey = Exx = Eyy = = = = 1720 N/mm2
2 2 2
(50)
GT L + GLR G12 + G23 1080 + 1640
gyz = gzx = Gyz = Gzx = = = = 1360 N/mm2
2 2 2
(51)
−3
prxy = νxy = νRT = −ERR × sT R = −E33 × s13 = 2280 × 0, 310 · 10 = 0, 707
(52)
νRL + νT L (−ERR × sLR ) + (−ET T × sLT )
prxz = pryz = νxz = νyz = = =
2 2
(−E33 × s23 ) + (−E22 × s21 ) (2280 × 0, 032 · 10−3 ) + (1160 × 0, 037 · 10−3 )
= = =
2 2
= 0, 058 (53)
A-10
Appendix E Test results
A-11
Table 15: Transverse bending test results of test series V6.
hsp Em,90
bsp in ssp in asp in F in δ in fm,90 in Failure Failed
Test in in Beam Glue
mm mm mm kN mm N/mm2 type layer(s)
mm N/mm2
V6.1 70,00 36,00 375,00 125,00 2,93 5,99 1777,51 12,12 GL40h 120 4 B 2 6 Terokal 221
V6.2 70,00 36,00 375,00 125,00 3,15 6,63 1754,29 13,02 GL40h 120 4 B 4 10+(11) Loctite 9483
V6.3 70,00 36,00 375,00 125,00 3,13 6,70 1738,81 12,95 GL40h 120 4 B 4 6+7 MC-Quicksolid
V6.4 70,00 36,00 375,00 125,00 3,07 6,33 1748,23 12,67 GL40h 120 4 B 2 6 Macroplast UK8103
V6.5 70,00 36,00 375,00 125,00 3,12 6,39 1763,18 12,91 GL40h 120 4 B 2+3 9+(8) Macroplast UR7225
Average 3,08 6,41 1756,41 12,73
Max 3,15 6,70 1777,51 13,02
Min 2,93 5,99 1738,81 12,12
Standard deviation 0,09 0,28 14,77 0,37
Table 16: Transverse tension test results of test series V4.
A-12
hsp
bsp in lsp in lef in F in δ in Et,90 in ft,90 in ε in Failure Failed
Test in Beam Glue
mm mm mm kN mm N/mm2 N/mm2 % type layer(s)
mm
V4.1 70,00 36,00 390,00 80,00 19,72 1,00 1874,71 7,92 0,44 GL40h 120 4 B 5 3 Terokal 221
V4.2 70,00 36,00 390,00 80,00 15,07 0,86 1678,25 6,05 0,37 GL40h 120 4 B 3 8+9 Loctite 9483
V4.3 70,00 36,00 390,00 80,00 19,46 1,35 1385,38 7,81 0,59 GL40h 120 4 B 2+5 14 MC-Quicksolid
V4.4 70,00 36,00 390,00 80,00 18,21 1,11 1570,37 7,31 0,48 GL40h 120 4 B 2+5 14 Macroplast UK8103
V4.5 70,00 36,00 390,00 80,00 21,91 1,44 1412,96 8,79 0,63 GL40h 120 4 B 2+5 14 Macroplast UR7225
Average 18,87 1,15 1584,33 7,57 0,50
Max 21,91 1,44 1874,71 8,79 0,63
Min 15,07 0,86 1385,38 6,05 0,37
Standard deviation 2,51 0,24 201,42 1,01 0,10
Table 17: Transverse bending test results of test series V1.1 to V1.5.
Em,90
bsp in hsp in ssp in asp in F in δ in fm,90 in Failure
Test in Beam Failed layer(s)
mm mm mm mm kN mm N/mm2 type
N/mm2
V1.1 70,00 36,00 280,00 90,00 3,04 3,94 1138,58 9,05 GL40h 115 6 B 1 5
V1.2 70,00 36,00 280,00 90,00 3,01 3,92 1137,12 8,94 GL40h 115 6 B 1 5
V1.3 70,00 36,00 280,00 90,00 2,95 3,78 1143,00 8,77 GL40h 115 6 B 1 5
V1.4 70,00 36,00 280,00 90,00 3,11 4,07 1122,19 9,25 GL40h 115 6 B 1 5
V1.5 70,00 36,00 280,00 90,00 3,29 4,28 1144,76 9,80 GL40h 115 6 B 1 5
Average 3,08 4,00 1137,13 9,16
Max 3,29 4,28 1144,76 9,80
Min 2,95 3,78 1122,19 8,77
A-13
Table 18: Transverse bending test results of test series V1.6.1 to V1.7.2.
Em,90
N/mm2
V1.6.1 30,00 36,00 280,00 90,00 0,89 2,44 1230,10 6,16 GL40h 115 6 B 1 5
V1.6.2 30,00 36,00 280,00 90,00 1,38 3,97 1171,80 9,57 GL40h 115 6 B 1 5
V1.7.1 30,00 36,00 280,00 90,00 1,28 3,57 1222,95 8,88 GL40h 115 6 B 1 5
V1.7.2 30,00 36,00 280,00 90,00 1,48 4,22 1184,13 10,3 GL40h 115 6 B 1 5
Average 1,26 3,55 1202,24 8,73
Max 1,48 4,22 1230,10 10,3
Min 0,89 2,44 1171,80 6,16
Table 19: Transverse bending test results of test series V1.8.1 to V1.9.2.
Em,90
N/mm2
V1.8.1 70,00 13,00 280,00 90,00 0,29 6,51 1336,69 6,60 GL40h 115 6 B 1 5
V1.8.2 70,00 13,00 280,00 90,00 0,54 12,98 1348,72 12,35 GL40h 115 6 B 1 5
V1.9.1 70,00 13,00 280,00 90,00 0,40 8,81 1382,55 9,03 GL40h 115 6 B 1 5
V1.9.2 70,00 13,00 280,00 90,00 0,60 13,41 1394,90 13,59 GL40h 115 6 B 1 7
Average 0,46 10,43 1365,71 10,40
Max 0,60 13,41 1394,90 13,59
Min 0,29 6,51 1336,69 6,60
Table 20: Transverse bending test results of test series V7, including test V1.1).
A-14
Em,90
N/mm2
V1.1 70,00 36,00 280,00 90,00 3,04 3,94 1138,58 9,05 GL40h 115 6 B 1 5
V7.1 70,00 36,00 280,00 90,00 3,76 3,66 1471,79 11,18 GL40h 120 3 B 2+4 4+5
V7.2 70,00 36,00 280,00 90,00 3,84 3,99 1430,56 11,43 GL40h 155 2 A 1 5
V7.3 70,00 36,00 280,00 90,00 3,81 4,27 1334,30 11,34 GL40h 170 1 A 1+4 7+(8)
V7.4 70,00 36,00 280,00 90,00 3,76 4,99 1151,20 11,19 GL40h 170 2 A 2 9
Average 3,64 4,17 1305,29 10,84
Max 3,84 4,99 1471,79 11,43
Min 3,04 3,66 1138,58 9,05
Table 21: Transverse bending test results of test V9.1.
Em,90
N/mm2
V9.1 70,00 36,00 375,00 125,00 2,58 8,01 1194,78 10,67 GL28h B 2+3 8+(9)
Table 22: Transverse bending test results of test series V9.2.
Em,90
N/mm2
V9.2 70,00 36,00 375,00 125,00 2,29 5,90 1405,93 9,47 GL32h B 2+3 8+(9)
Table 23: Transverse bending test results of test series V9.3 and V9.4.
A-15
Em,90
N/mm2
V9.3 70,00 36,00 375,00 125,00 1,84 4,71 1398,36 7,59 GL36h 1 B 2+3 9+(8)
V9.4a 70,00 36,00 375,00 125,00 1,87 4,83 1379,37 7,72 GL36h 2 L 2+3 8+(9)
Average 1,85 4,77 1388,86 7,65
Max 1,87 4,83 1398,36 7,72
Min 1,84 4,71 1379,37 7,59
a
Layers 8 to 16 are made from beam GL36h 2 L, but layers 1-8 were falsely made from beam GL36h 1 B, in this last beam layer 1 is the bottom (u) layer and layer
8 is the top (o) layer
Table 24: Transverse bending test results of test series V9.5 and V9.16 (including test V6.5).
Em,90
N/mm2
V9.5a 70,00 36,00 375,00 125,00 1,66 4,18 1425,33 6,86 GL40h 115 1 B 1+6 8/9/(10)
V9.6 70,00 36,00 375,00 125,00 2,08 6,13 1211,09 8,59 GL40h 115 2 A 1+3+4 11+(10+12)
V9.7 70,00 36,00 375,00 125,00 2,12 5,88 1282,26 8,75 GL40h 115 3 A 2+3 10+(11)
V9.8 70,00 36,00 375,00 125,00 2,23 7,30 1149,15 9,23 GL40h 115 4 B 1+2 7
V9.9 70,00 36,00 375,00 125,00 2,92 8,48 1301,46 12,09 GL40h 115 5 B 1+2 6
V9.10 70,00 36,00 375,00 125,00 2,71 6,69 1470,05 11,22 GL40h 120 1 B 2+3 8+(9)
V9.11 70,00 36,00 375,00 125,00 1,52 3,88 1412,76 6,30 GL40h 120 2 B 3 8+9
V6.5 70,00 36,00 375,00 125,00 3,12 6,39 1763,18 12,91 GL40h 120 4 B 2+3 9+(8)
A-16
V9.12 70,00 36,00 375,00 125,00 2,41 5,80 1511,74 9,96 GL40h 155 1 B 2+3 9+(8)
V9.13 70,00 36,00 375,00 125,00 1,79 3,63 1723,10 7,39 GL40h 185 1 C 2+3 9+(8)
V9.14 70,00 36,00 375,00 125,00 2,50 6,07 1501,66 10,33 GL40h 185 2 C 2+3 9+(8)
V9.15 70,00 36,00 375,00 125,00 2,44 6,10 1459,74 10,07 GL40h 200 1 C 2+3 8+(9)
V9.16 70,00 36,00 375,00 125,00 2,56 6,10 1508,11 10,59 GL40h 200 2 C 1 10+(9)
Average 2,31 5,89 1439,97 9,56
Max 3,12 8,48 1763,18 12,91
Min 1,52 3,63 1149,15 6,30
a
This specimen had a crack in layer 8
Table 25: Transverse bending test results of test series V11.
Em,90
N/mm2
V11.1 70,00 50,00 375,00 125,00 3,43 4,24 1097,21 7,35 GL40h 115 2 A 2+3 10+11+12
V11.2 70,00 50,00 375,00 125,00 3,51 4,02 1159,86 7,53 GL40h 115 3 A 2+3 10+11
V11.3 70,00 50,00 375,00 125,00 3,58 3,54 1357,19 7,66 GL40h 155 1 B 2+3 8+(9)
V11.4 70,00 50,00 375,00 125,00 4,49 4,52 1337,15 9,61 GL40h 200 1 C 2+3 8+(9)
V11.5 70,00 50,00 375,00 125,00 3,33 3,39 1300,96 7,14 GL40h 200 2 C 2+3 9+(8)
Average 3,67 3,94 1250,47 7,86
Max 4,49 4,52 1357,19 9,61
Min 3,33 3,39 1097,21 7,14
Table 26: Transverse tension test results of test series V2(the pre drilled holes were not straight, to get ”good” results the tests were repeated
A-17
in series V3).
bsp in hsp in lsp in lef in F in δ in Et,90 in ft,90 in ε in

Test Beam Failure type Failed layer(s)
mm mm mm mm kN mm N/mm2 N/mm2 %
V2.1 70,00 36,00 295,00 80,00 16,29 1,01 1009,08 6,54 0,75 GL40h 115 6 B 1 5
V2.2 70,00 36,00 295,00 80,00 17,79 0,87 1213,75 7,14 0,64 GL40h 115 6 B 4+5 3
V2.3 70,00 36,00 295,00 80,00 17,51 0,88 1240,48 7,03 0,65 GL40h 115 6 B 4+5 9+(10)
V2.4 70,00 36,00 295,00 80,00 18,33 0,86 1295,77 7,36 0,64 GL40h 115 6 B 4+5 3+(4)
V2.5 70,00 36,00 295,00 80,00 18,15 0,93 1126,76 7,29 0,69 GL40h 115 6 B 4+5 3+(4)
Average 17,62 0,91 1177,17 7,07 0,67
Max 18,33 1,01 1295,77 7,36 0,75
Min 16,29 0,86 1009,08 6,54 0,64
Table 27: Transverse tension test results of test V3.1.

V3.1a 58,50 36,00 295,00 80,00 14,61 1,06 983,88 7,03 0,79 GL40h 115 6 B 1 5
Table 28: Transverse tension test results of test series V3.2 to V3.6.

V3.2 70,00 36,00 295,00 80,00 15,96 0,90 1040,85 6,40 0,67 GL40h 115 6 B 1+4 5+(6)
V3.3 70,00 36,00 295,00 80,00 18,13 1,09 991,80 7,28 0,81 GL40h 115 6 B 2+5 9
V3.4 70,00 36,00 295,00 80,00 10,59 0,62 860,41 4,25 0,46 GL40h 115 6 B 1+4 5+(4)
V3.5 70,00 36,00 295,00 80,00 10,94 0,63 924,14 4,39 0,47 GL40h 115 6 B 1+4 5+(4)
V3.6 70,00 36,00 295,00 80,00 14,97 0,88 943,52 6,01 0,66 GL40h 115 6 B 2+4 3+(4)
Average 14,12 0,83 952,15 5,67 0,61
Max 18,13 1,09 1040,85 7,28 0,81
A-18
Min 10,59 0,62 860,41 4,25 0,46
Table 29: Transverse tension test results of test series V3.7 to V3.8 (These tests lef was only 60 but lmeas was the same 135 as for the
others).

V3.7 36,00 36,00 295,00 60,00 8,54 0,91 1095,68 6,73 0,68 GL40h 115 6 B 2+5 2+3
V3.8 36,00 36,00 295,00 60,00 9,87 1,03 1065,84 7,79 0,76 GL40h 115 6 B 2+5 2+3
Average 9,20 0,97 1080,76 7,26 0,72
Max 9,87 1,03 1095,68 7,79 0,76
Min 8,54 0,91 1065,84 6,73 0,68
a
notched specimen
Table 30: Transverse tension test results of test series V2 and V3.

V2.1 70,00 36,00 295,00 80,00 16,29 1,01 1009,08 6,54 0,75 GL40h 115 6 B 1 5
V2.2 70,00 36,00 295,00 80,00 17,79 0,87 1213,75 7,14 0,64 GL40h 115 6 B 4+5 3
V2.3 70,00 36,00 295,00 80,00 17,51 0,88 1240,48 7,03 0,65 GL40h 115 6 B 4+5 9+(10)
V2.4 70,00 36,00 295,00 80,00 18,33 0,86 1295,77 7,36 0,64 GL40h 115 6 B 4+5 3+(4)
V2.5 70,00 36,00 295,00 80,00 18,15 0,93 1126,76 7,29 0,69 GL40h 115 6 B 4+5 3+(4)
V3.2 70,00 36,00 295,00 80,00 15,96 0,90 1040,85 6,40 0,67 GL40h 115 6 B 1+4 5+(6)
A-19
V3.3 70,00 36,00 295,00 80,00 18,13 1,09 991,80 7,28 0,81 GL40h 115 6 B 2+5 9
V3.4 70,00 36,00 295,00 80,00 10,59 0,62 860,41 4,25 0,46 GL40h 115 6 B 1+4 5+(4)
V3.5 70,00 36,00 295,00 80,00 10,94 0,63 924,14 4,39 0,47 GL40h 115 6 B 1+4 5+(4)
V3.6 70,00 36,00 295,00 80,00 14,97 0,88 943,52 6,01 0,66 GL40h 115 6 B 2+4 3+(4)
Average 15,87 0,87 1064,66 6,37 0,64
Max 18,33 1,09 1295,77 7,36 0,81
Min 10,59 0,62 860,41 4,25 0,46
Table 31: Transverse tension test results of test series V5 including test V3.2.

V3.2 70,00 36,00 295,00 80,00 15,96 0,90 1040,85 6,40 0,67 GL40h 115 6 B 1+4 5+(6)
V5.1 70,00 36,00 295,00 80,00 18,42 0,68 1499,46 7,39 0,51 GL40h 120 3 B 1+2+5 9+10
V5.2a 70,00 36,00 295,00 80,00 9,47 0,35 1512,73 3,80 0,26 GL40h 155 2 A 4+6 5+(4)
V5.3 70,00 36,00 295,00 80,00 15,59 0,70 1217,89 6,26 0,52 GL40h 170 1 A 4+5 10+(9)
A-20
V5.4 70,00 36,00 295,00 80,00 14,38 0,80 1000,31 5,77 0,59 GL40h 170 2 A 4+5 3+(4)
Average 14,76 0,69 1254,25 5,92 0,51
Max 18,42 0,90 1512,73 7,39 0,67
Min 9,47 0,35 1000,31 3,80 0,26
a
Knothole in the Glulam glue joint (reduced resisting area)
Table 32: Transverse tension test results of test series V8.1.

V8.1 70,00 36,00 390,00 80,00 18,07 1,34 1340,03 7,25 0,58 GL28h B 1+4+5 3+(2)
Table 33: Transverse tension test results of test series V8.2.

V8.2 70,00 36,00 390,00 80,00 15,00 0,86 1670,94 6,02 0,37 GL32h B 2+3 9+(8)
Table 34: Transverse tension test results of test series V8.3 to V8.4.
A-21
V8.3 70,00 36,00 390,00 80,00 14,80 0,86 1741,75 5,94 0,37 GL36h 1 R 2+3 9+(8)
V8.4 70,00 36,00 390,00 80,00 11,60 0,64 1813,70 4,66 0,28 GL36h 2 L 2+3 9+(8)
Average 13,20 0,75 1777,73 5,30 0,33
Max 14,80 0,86 1813,70 5,94 0,37
Min 11,60 0,64 1741,75 4,66 0,28
Table 35: Transverse tension test results of tests V8.5 V8.6.

V8.6 70,00 36,00 490,00 80,00 10,92 1,22 1198,84 4,38 0,37 GL40h 115 2 A 2+3 11+(10)
V8.7 70,00 36,00 490,00 80,00 12,56 1,42 1215,71 5,04 0,43 GL40h 115 3 A 2+3 10+(11)
Average 11,74 1,32 1207,28 4,71 0,40
Max 12,56 1,42 1215,71 5,04 0,43
Min 10,92 1,22 1198,84 4,38 0,37
Table 36: Transverse tension test results of test series V8.8 to V8.16, including V8.5 and V4.5.

V8.5a 70,00 36,00 390,00 80,00 5,47 0,37 1465,61 2,20 0,16 GL40h 115 1 B 1+6 8
V8.8 70,00 36,00 390,00 80,00 13,58 1,01 1297,60 5,45 0,44 GL40h 115 4 B 2+3 8+(9)
A-22
V8.9 70,00 36,00 390,00 80,00 17,43 1,13 1495,45 7,00 0,49 GL40h 115 5 B 4+5 13+(14)
V8.10 70,00 36,00 390,00 80,00 16,37 0,88 1793,35 6,57 0,38 GL40h 120 1 B 4+5 14+(13)
V8.11 70,00 36,00 390,00 80,00 13,07 0,75 1575,65 5,24 0,32 GL40h 120 2 B 4+5 14+(13)
V4.5 70,00 36,00 390,00 80,00 21,91 1,44 1412,96 8,79 0,63 GL40h 120 4 B 2+5 14
V8.12 70,00 36,00 390,00 80,00 16,24 0,83 1914,31 6,52 0,36 GL40h 155 1 B 5 14
V8.13 70,00 36,00 390,00 80,00 13,96 0,58 2297,79 5,60 0,25 GL40h 185 1 C 2+3 9+(8)
V8.14 70,00 36,00 390,00 80,00 15,23 0,86 1655,25 6,11 0,38 GL40h 185 2 C 2+3 8+(9)
V8.15 70,00 36,00 390,00 80,00 15,78 0,86 1783,79 6,33 0,37 GL40h 200 1 C 1+2+3+5 13+(14)
V8.16 70,00 36,00 390,00 80,00 17,15 0,94 1739,18 6,88 0,41 GL40h 200 2 C 2+3+5 13+(14)
Average 15,11 0,88 1675,54 6,06 0,38
Max 21,91 1,44 2297,79 8,79 0,63
Min 5,47 0,37 1297,60 2,20 0,16
a
this specimen failed much before the others because it had a crack in layer 8)
Table 37: Transverse tension test results of tests V10.1 and V10.2.

V10.1 70,00 50,00 490,00 80,00 17,44 1,33 1214,75 5,02 0,40 GL40h 115 2 A 4 4+(3)
V10.2 70,00 50,00 490,00 80,00 14,47 1,14 1308,57 4,17 0,35 GL40h 115 3 A 2+3 10+(11)
Average 15,96 1,24 1261,66 4,60 0,37
Max 17,44 1,33 1308,57 5,02 0,40
Min 14,47 1,14 1214,75 4,17 0,35
Table 38: Transverse tension test results of tests V10.3 to V10.4.
A-23
V10.3 70,00 50,00 390,00 80,00 18,86 0,71 1845,83 5,43 0,31 GL40h 155 1 B 4 3+(4)
V10.4 70,00 50,00 390,00 80,00 19,45 0,80 1649,26 5,60 0,35 GL40h 200 1 C 2+3 8+(9)
V10.5 70,00 50,00 390,00 80,00 18,07 0,73 1721,56 5,20 0,32 GL40h 200 2 C 2+3 9+(8)
Average 18,79 0,75 1738,88 5,41 0,32
Max 19,45 0,80 1845,83 5,60 0,35
Min 18,07 0,71 1649,26 5,20 0,31
Appendix F APDL Source code
A-24
!_________________________________________________________________________________________
! 1 Wood transom for a wood-glass facade
!-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
!_________________________________________________________________________________________
!{ ! 1.1 Start
!-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
finish
/clear
/filname,Woodbeam
/title,
/prep7
/pbc,all,,1 ! Show Support Conditions
/psf,pres,norm,2,0,on ! Show Loads
seltol,0.001 ! Tolerance for nsel
*cfclos ! Closes the "command" file
!} !_________________________________________________________________________________________
!_________________________________________________________________________________________
!{ ! 1.3 Variables
!-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
!When varying the element length pay attension to the other variables...
!For ex.the screws must lay between two elements...!!!
!Transom
h=50 ! Transom Hight(cross-section)
b=200 ! Transom Width(cross-section)
l=400 ! Transom Length
!Slot
hn=10 !13 ! Slot Hight
bn=5 !7 ! Slot Width
!Metal Profile
hs=h ! Profile Hight
bs=5 ! Metal Profile Width
ls=hs ! Metal Profile Length
!Screw
d=4.5 ! Screw Diameter
dk=3 ! Screw Core Diameter
py=30 !25 ! Screw Spacing in y Direction
pz=50 ! Screw Spacing in z Direction
ey=(h-py)/2 ! Edge Distance in y Direction
ez=50 ! Edge Distance in z Direction
lef=40 ! Effective Length
!Tenons
ht=h/5
bt=2*b/10
lt=10
bst=(b-(3*bt))/4
!Elements
A-25
elx=5 ! Element Length in x Direction
ely=5 !2.5 ! Element Length in y Direction
elz=25 ! Element Length in z Direction
elx1=2.5
elzt=5 ! Element length of the tenons in z Direction
!} !_________________________________________________________________________________________
!_________________________________________________________________________________________
!{ ! 1.4 Material Properties
!-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
!{ ! 1.4.1 Wood
!-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
!Beech (according to Neuhaus.2009)
Ehx=1720 ! Modulus of elasticity in x direction
Ehy=1720 ! Modulus of elasticity in y direction
Ehz=14000 ! Modulus of elasticity in z direction
Gh=1360 ! Modulus of rigidity (Shear modulus)
Ghr=470 ! Modulus of rigidity (Rolling Shear Modulus)
pxy=0.707 ! Poisson's ratio
pxz=0.058 ! Poisson's ratio
pyz=0.058 ! Poisson's ratio
!} !_____________________________________________________________________________________
!{ ! 1.4.2 Aluminium
!-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ealu= 70000 ! Modulus of elasticity
Galu= 26000 ! Modulus of rigidity (Shear modulus)
palu= 0.35 ! Poisson's ratio
!} !_____________________________________________________________________________________
!{ ! 1.4.3 Steel
!-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Es= 210000 ! Modulus of elasticity
Gs= 81000 ! Modulus of rigidity (Shear modulus)
ps= 0.3 ! Poisson's ratio
!} !_____________________________________________________________________________________
!} !_________________________________________________________________________________________
!_________________________________________________________________________________________
!{ ! 1.5 Elements Types (et)
!-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
!{ ! 1.5.1 Wood
!-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
et,1,solid185 !solid186
!} !_____________________________________________________________________________________
!{ ! 1.5.2 Metal
!-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
et,2,solid185 !solid186
A-26
!} !_____________________________________________________________________________________
!{ ! 1.5.3 Screws
!-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
et,3,beam188 !beam189
sectype,3,beam,csolid
secdata,dk/2
keyopt,3,6,3 ! Keyopt(6) -> Output control for section forces/moments and
! strains/curvatures; = 0 (Output section forces/moments and
!strains/curvatures at integration points along the length);
!3 (Output section forces/moments and strains/curvatures
!extrapolated to the element nodes)
!} !_____________________________________________________________________________________
!{ ! 1.5.4 Contakt Elements

!-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
et,4,conta173 !conta174 ! 3-D 4-Node Surface-to-Surface Contact
keyopt,4,2,1 ! Keyopt(2) -> Contact algorithm; = 1 (Penalty); 4 (Lagrange)
keyopt,4,5,4 ! Keyopt(5) -> CNOF/ICONT automated adjustment;
!= 1 (Close gap with auto CNOF) ; = 4 (Auto ICONT)
!} !_____________________________________________________________________________________
!{ ! 1.5.5 Target Elements

!-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
et,5,targe170 ! 3-D Target Segment
!} !_____________________________________________________________________________________
!{ ! 1.5.6 Axial Springs [Beech] (in x-Direction)

!-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
et,6,combin39
keyopt,6,3,1 ! Element degrees of freedom: Displacementalong nodal x-axes
*do,i,0,1,1 ! Axial Springs with the whole/half catchment area
! real30 whole catchment area; real31 half catchment area
fi=(d/6)*elx*(0.5**i) ! Faktor n regulates the stiffness of the springs.
! Kurves for diameter=6[mm]. The screws of this model have diamete=d[mm].
! Multiplied by the element length because the curves are given in (N/mm of screw lenght)
/input,C:\Arbeit\fax_Bu_FSH_6mm,txt,,, ! INPUT FILE
*enddo
!} !_____________________________________________________________________________________
!{ ! 1.5.7 Hole Bearing Springs [Beech] (in y-Direction)

!-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
et,7,combin39
keyopt,7,3,2
*do,i,0,1,1 ! real40 whole catchment area; real41 half catchment area
fi=(d/6)*ely*(0.5**i)
/input,C:\Arbeit\fhy_Bu_FSH_6mm,txt,,, ! INPUT FILE
*enddo
!} !_____________________________________________________________________________________
!{ ! 1.5.7 Hole Bearing Springs [Beech] (in z-Direction)

!-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
et,8,combin39
keyopt,8,3,3
*do,i,0,1,1 ! real40 whole catchment area; real41 half catchment
A-27
area
fi=(d/6)*elz*(0.5**i)
/input,C:\Arbeit\fhz_Bu_FSH_6mm,txt,,, ! INPUT FILE
*enddo
!} !_____________________________________________________________________________________
!} !_________________________________________________________________________________________
!_________________________________________________________________________________________
!{ ! 1.6 Materials (mp)
!-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
!{ ! 1.6.1 Wood
!-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
mp,ex,1,Ehx
mp,ey,1,Ehy
mp,ez,1,Ehz
mp,gxy,1,Ghr
mp,gxz,1,Gh
mp,gyz,1,Gh
mp,prxy,1,pxy
mp,prxz,1,pxz
mp,pryz,1,pyz
!} !_____________________________________________________________________________________
!{ ! 1.6.2 Metal Profile

!-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
mp,ex,2,Ealu
mp,ey,2,Ealu
mp,ez,2,Ealu
mp,gxy,2,Galu
mp,gxz,2,Galu
mp,gyz,2,Galu
mp,prxy,2,palu
mp,prxz,2,palu
mp,pryz,2,palu
!} !_____________________________________________________________________________________
!{ ! 1.6.3 Screws
!-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
mp,ex,3,Es
mp,ey,3,Es
mp,ez,3,Es
mp,gxy,3,Gs
mp,gxz,3,Gs
mp,gyz,3,Gs
mp,prxy,3,ps
mp,prxz,3,ps
mp,pryz,3,ps
!} !_____________________________________________________________________________________
!} !_________________________________________________________________________________________
!_________________________________________________________________________________________
!{ ! 1.7 Geometry & Meshing
A-28
!-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
!{ ! 1.7.1 Wood
!-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
!{ ! 1.7.1.1 Geometry
!-----------------------------------------
block,0, (b-(3*bt))/4, 0, ht, 0,l
block,0, (b-(3*bt))/4, ht, ht+(h-(3*ht))/2, 0,l
block,0, (b-(3*bt))/4, ht+(h-(3*ht))/2, 2*ht+(h-(3*ht))/2, 0,l
block,0, (b-(3*bt))/4, 2*ht+(h-(3*ht))/2, 2*ht+2*(h-(3*ht))/2,0,l
block,0, (b-(3*bt))/4, 2*ht+2*(h-(3*ht))/2,3*ht+2*(h-(3*ht))/2,0,l
block,(b-(3*bt))/4, (b-(3*bt))/4+bt, 0, ht, 0,l

block,(b-(3*bt))/4, (b-(3*bt))/4+bt, ht, ht+(h-(3*ht))/2, 0,l
block,(b-(3*bt))/4, (b-(3*bt))/4+bt, ht+(h-(3*ht))/2, 2*ht+(h-(3*ht))/2, 0,l
block,(b-(3*bt))/4, (b-(3*bt))/4+bt, 2*ht+(h-(3*ht))/2, 2*ht+2*(h-(3*ht))/2,0,l
block,(b-(3*bt))/4, (b-(3*bt))/4+bt, 2*ht+2*(h-(3*ht))/2,3*ht+2*(h-(3*ht))/2,0,l
block,(b-(3*bt))/4+bt, 2*(b-(3*bt))/4+bt, 0, ht, 0,l

block,(b-(3*bt))/4+bt, 2*(b-(3*bt))/4+bt, ht, ht+(h-(3*ht))/2, 0,l
block,(b-(3*bt))/4+bt, 2*(b-(3*bt))/4+bt, ht+(h-(3*ht))/2, 2*ht+(h-(3*ht))/2, 0,l
block,(b-(3*bt))/4+bt, 2*(b-(3*bt))/4+bt, 2*ht+(h-(3*ht))/2, 2*ht+2*(h-(3*ht))/2,0,l
block,(b-(3*bt))/4+bt, 2*(b-(3*bt))/4+bt, 2*ht+2*(h-(3*ht))/2,3*ht+2*(h-(3*ht))/2,0,l
block,2*(b-(3*bt))/4+bt, 2*(b-(3*bt))/4+2*bt,0, ht, 0,l

block,2*(b-(3*bt))/4+bt, 2*(b-(3*bt))/4+2*bt,ht, ht+(h-(3*ht))/2, 0,l
block,2*(b-(3*bt))/4+bt, 2*(b-(3*bt))/4+2*bt,ht+(h-(3*ht))/2, 2*ht+(h-(3*ht))/2, 0,l
block,2*(b-(3*bt))/4+bt, 2*(b-(3*bt))/4+2*bt,2*ht+(h-(3*ht))/2, 2*ht+2*(h-(3*ht))/2,0,l
block,2*(b-(3*bt))/4+bt, 2*(b-(3*bt))/4+2*bt,2*ht+2*(h-(3*ht))/2,3*ht+2*(h-(3*ht))/2,0,l
block,2*(b-(3*bt))/4+2*bt, 3*(b-(3*bt))/4+2*bt,0, ht, 0,l

block,2*(b-(3*bt))/4+2*bt, 3*(b-(3*bt))/4+2*bt,ht, ht+(h-(3*ht))/2, 0,l
block,2*(b-(3*bt))/4+2*bt, 3*(b-(3*bt))/4+2*bt,ht+(h-(3*ht))/2, 2*ht+(h-(3*ht))/2, 0,l
block,2*(b-(3*bt))/4+2*bt, 3*(b-(3*bt))/4+2*bt,2*ht+(h-(3*ht))/2, 2*ht+2*(h-(3*ht))/2,0,l
block,2*(b-(3*bt))/4+2*bt, 3*(b-(3*bt))/4+2*bt,2*ht+2*(h-(3*ht))/2,3*ht+2*(h-(3*ht))/2,0,l
block,3*(b-(3*bt))/4+2*bt, 3*(b-(3*bt))/4+3*bt,0, ht, 0,l

block,3*(b-(3*bt))/4+2*bt, 3*(b-(3*bt))/4+3*bt,ht, ht+(h-(3*ht))/2, 0,l
block,3*(b-(3*bt))/4+2*bt, 3*(b-(3*bt))/4+3*bt,ht+(h-(3*ht))/2, 2*ht+(h-(3*ht))/2, 0,l
block,3*(b-(3*bt))/4+2*bt, 3*(b-(3*bt))/4+3*bt,2*ht+(h-(3*ht))/2, 2*ht+2*(h-(3*ht))/2,0,l
block,3*(b-(3*bt))/4+2*bt, 3*(b-(3*bt))/4+3*bt,2*ht+2*(h-(3*ht))/2,3*ht+2*(h-(3*ht))/2,0,l
block,3*(b-(3*bt))/4+3*bt, b-bn, 0, ht, 0,l

block,3*(b-(3*bt))/4+3*bt, b-bn, ht, ht+(h-(3*ht))/2, 0,l
block,3*(b-(3*bt))/4+3*bt, b-bn, ht+(h-(3*ht))/2, 2*ht+(h-(3*ht))/2, 0,l
block,3*(b-(3*bt))/4+3*bt, b-bn, 2*ht+(h-(3*ht))/2, 2*ht+2*(h-(3*ht))/2,0,l
block,3*(b-(3*bt))/4+3*bt, b-bn, 2*ht+2*(h-(3*ht))/2,3*ht+2*(h-(3*ht))/2,0,l
block,b-bn, b, 0, ht, 0,l

block,b-bn, b, ht, ht+(h-(3*ht))/2, 0,l
block,b-bn, b, 2*ht+(h-(3*ht))/2, 2*ht+2*(h-(3*ht))/2,0,l
block,b-bn, b, 2*ht+2*(h-(3*ht))/2,3*ht+2*(h-(3*ht))/2,0,l
A-29
block,(b-(3*bt))/4, (b-(3*bt))/4+bt, 0, ht, 0,-lt
block,(b-(3*bt))/4, (b-(3*bt))/4+bt, ht+(h-(3*ht))/2, 2*ht+(h-(3*ht))/2, 0,-lt
block,(b-(3*bt))/4, (b-(3*bt))/4+bt, 2*ht+2*(h-(3*ht))/2,3*ht+2*(h-(3*ht))/2,0,-lt
block,2*(b-(3*bt))/4+bt, 2*(b-(3*bt))/4+2*bt,0, ht, 0,-lt

block,2*(b-(3*bt))/4+bt, 2*(b-(3*bt))/4+2*bt,ht+(h-(3*ht))/2, 2*ht+(h-(3*ht))/2, 0,-lt
block,2*(b-(3*bt))/4+bt, 2*(b-(3*bt))/4+2*bt,2*ht+2*(h-(3*ht))/2,3*ht+2*(h-(3*ht))/2,0,-lt
block,3*(b-(3*bt))/4+2*bt, 3*(b-(3*bt))/4+3*bt,0, ht, 0,-lt

block,3*(b-(3*bt))/4+2*bt, 3*(b-(3*bt))/4+3*bt,ht+(h-(3*ht))/2, 2*ht+(h-(3*ht))/2, 0,-lt
block,3*(b-(3*bt))/4+2*bt, 3*(b-(3*bt))/4+3*bt,2*ht+2*(h-(3*ht))/2,3*ht+2*(h-(3*ht))/2,0,-
lt
alls
vglue,all
alls
!} !_________________________________________
!{ ! 1.7.1.2 "Pre"-Meshing
!-----------------------------------------
!x and y directions
alls
!0
lsel,s,loc,z,0 $ lsel,r,loc,x,0 $ lesize,all,ely $ alls
lsel,s,loc,z,l $ lsel,r,loc,x,0 $ lesize,all,ely $ alls
!1
lsel,s,loc,z,0 $ lsel,r,loc,x,bst/2 $ lesize,all,elx $ alls
lsel,s,loc,z,l $ lsel,r,loc,x,bst/2 $ lesize,all,elx $ alls
!2
lsel,s,loc,z,0 $ lsel,r,loc,x,bst $ lesize,all,ely $ alls
lsel,s,loc,z,l $ lsel,r,loc,x,bst $ lesize,all,ely $ alls
lsel,s,loc,z,-lt $ lsel,r,loc,x,bst $ lesize,all,ely $ alls
!4
lsel,s,loc,z,0 $ lsel,r,loc,x,bst+(bt/2) $ lesize,all,elx $ alls
lsel,s,loc,z,l $ lsel,r,loc,x,bst+(bt/2) $ lesize,all,elx $ alls
lsel,s,loc,z,-lt $ lsel,r,loc,x,bst+(bt/2) $ lesize,all,elx $ alls
!6
lsel,s,loc,z,0 $ lsel,r,loc,x,bst+bt $ lesize,all,ely $ alls
lsel,s,loc,z,l $ lsel,r,loc,x,bst+bt $ lesize,all,ely $ alls
lsel,s,loc,z,-lt $ lsel,r,loc,x,bst+bt $ lesize,all,ely $ alls
!7
lsel,s,loc,z,0 $ lsel,r,loc,x,(3*(bst/2))+bt $ lesize,all,elx $ alls
lsel,s,loc,z,l $ lsel,r,loc,x,(3*(bst/2))+bt $ lesize,all,elx $ alls
!8
lsel,s,loc,z,0 $ lsel,r,loc,x,2*bst+bt $ lesize,all,ely $ alls
lsel,s,loc,z,l $ lsel,r,loc,x,2*bst+bt $ lesize,all,ely $ alls
lsel,s,loc,z,-lt $ lsel,r,loc,x,2*bst+bt $ lesize,all,ely $ alls
!10
lsel,s,loc,z,0 $ lsel,r,loc,x,2*bst+((3*bt)/2) $ lesize,all,elx $ alls
lsel,s,loc,z,l $ lsel,r,loc,x,2*bst+((3*bt)/2) $ lesize,all,elx $ alls
lsel,s,loc,z,-lt $ lsel,r,loc,x,2*bst+((3*bt)/2) $ lesize,all,elx $ alls
!12
lsel,s,loc,z,0 $ lsel,r,loc,x,2*bst+2*bt $ lesize,all,ely $ alls
lsel,s,loc,z,l $ lsel,r,loc,x,2*bst+2*bt $ lesize,all,ely $ alls
lsel,s,loc,z,-lt $ lsel,r,loc,x,2*bst+2*bt $ lesize,all,ely $ alls
A-30
!13
lsel,s,loc,z,0 $ lsel,r,loc,x,(5*(bst/2))+2*bt $ lesize,all,elx $ alls
lsel,s,loc,z,l $ lsel,r,loc,x,(5*(bst/2))+2*bt $ lesize,all,elx $ alls
!14
!16
lsel,s,loc,z,0 $ lsel,r,loc,x,3*bst+((5*bt)/2) $ lesize,all,elx1 $ alls
lsel,s,loc,z,l $ lsel,r,loc,x,3*bst+((5*bt)/2) $ lesize,all,elx1 $ alls
lsel,s,loc,z,-lt $ lsel,r,loc,x,3*bst+((5*bt)/2) $ lesize,all,elx1 $ alls
!18
!18,75
lsel,s,loc,z,0 $ lsel,r,loc,x,((27*bst)/8)+3*bt $ lesize,all,elx1 $ alls
lsel,s,loc,z,l $ lsel,r,loc,x,((27*bst)/8)+3*bt $ lesize,all,elx1 $ alls
!19,5
lsel,s,loc,z,0 $ lsel,r,loc,x,(4*bst)+3*bt-bn $ lesize,all,ely $ alls
lsel,s,loc,z,l $ lsel,r,loc,x,(4*bst)+3*bt-bn $ lesize,all,ely $ alls
!19,75
lsel,s,loc,z,0 $ lsel,r,loc,x,(4*bst)+3*bt-(bn/2) $ lesize,all,elx1 $ alls
lsel,s,loc,z,l $ lsel,r,loc,x,(4*bst)+3*bt-(bn/2) $ lesize,all,elx1 $ alls
!20
lsel,s,loc,z,0 $ lsel,r,loc,x,(4*bst)+3*bt $ lesize,all,ely $ alls
lsel,s,loc,z,l $ lsel,r,loc,x,(4*bst)+3*bt $ lesize,all,ely $ alls
!z direction
lsel,s,loc,z,l/2 $ lesize,all,elz $ alls
lsel,s,loc,z,-lt/2 $ lesize,all,elzt $ alls !Tenons El length of in z Direct
!} !_________________________________________
!{ ! 1.7.1.3 Meshing
!-----------------------------------------
type,1
real,1
mat,1
alls
vmesh,all
alls
!} !_________________________________________
!} !_____________________________________________________________________________________
!{ ! 1.7.2 Metal
!-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
!{ ! 1.7.2.1 Geometry
!-----------------------------------------
block,b-bn, b, ht+(h-(3*ht))/2, 2*ht+(h-(3*ht))/2, 0,l
block,b, b+bs, 0, ht, 0,l
block,b, b+bs, ht, ht+(h-(3*ht))/2, 0,l
block,b, b+bs, ht+(h-(3*ht))/2, 2*ht+(h-(3*ht))/2, 0,l
block,b, b+bs, 2*ht+(h-(3*ht))/2, 2*ht+2*(h-(3*ht))/2,0,l
block,b, b+bs, 2*ht+2*(h-(3*ht))/2,3*ht+2*(h-(3*ht))/2,0,l
A-31
alls
vglue,2,3,4,5,6,7
alls
!} !_________________________________________
!{ ! 1.7.2.2 "Pre"-Meshing
!-----------------------------------------
!x and y directions
alls
!19,5
lsel,s,loc,z,0 $ lsel,r,loc,x,(4*bst)+3*bt-bn $ lesize,all,ely $ alls
lsel,s,loc,z,l $ lsel,r,loc,x,(4*bst)+3*bt-bn $ lesize,all,ely $
alls
!19,75
lsel,s,loc,z,0 $ lsel,r,loc,x,(4*bst)+3*bt-(bn/2)$ lesize,all,elx1 $ alls
lsel,s,loc,z,l $ lsel,r,loc,x,(4*bst)+3*bt-(bn/2)$ lesize,all,elx1 $ alls
!20
lsel,s,loc,z,0 $ lsel,r,loc,x,(4*bst)+3*bt $ lesize,all,ely $ alls
lsel,s,loc,z,l $ lsel,r,loc,x,(4*bst)+3*bt $ lesize,all,ely $ alls
!20,25
lsel,s,loc,z,0 $ lsel,r,loc,x,(4*bst)+3*bt+bs/2 $ lesize,all,elx1 $ alls
lsel,s,loc,z,l $ lsel,r,loc,x,(4*bst)+3*bt+bs/2 $ lesize,all,elx1 $ alls
!20,5
lsel,s,loc,z,0 $ lsel,r,loc,x,(4*bst)+3*bt+bs $ lesize,all,ely $ alls
lsel,s,loc,z,l $ lsel,r,loc,x,(4*bst)+3*bt+bs $ lesize,all,ely $
alls
!z direction
lsel,s,loc,z,l/2 $ lesize,all,elz $ alls
!} !_________________________________________
!{ ! 1.7.2.3 Meshing
!-----------------------------------------
type,2
real,2
mat,2
vmesh,2
vmesh,3
vmesh,8
vmesh,9
vmesh,10
vmesh,11
alls
!} !_________________________________________
!} !_____________________________________________________________________________________
!{ ! 1.7.3 Screws Top

!-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
!{ ! 1.7.3.1 Innicial Deffinitions

!-----------------------------------------
num1=(l-(2*ez))/pz ![num1] = whole number
num2=MOD(num1,1) ![num2] = decimal part of the innicial number
A-32
num3=num1-num2 ![num3]=round off of [num1]=number of inters crew distances
nscrew=num3+1 ![nscrew] = Number of possible screw peers
numstr,kp,1000 !Starting numbers for automatically numbered keypoints.

zlocscrewt=ez+(((l-2*ez)-num3*pz)/2)![zlocscrewt] = z location of the top screw
!} !_________________________________________
!{ ! 1.7.3.2 Geometry
!-----------------------------------------
*do,i,1,nscrew,1 !Iniciating the *DO Loop
k,,b-lef,h-ey,zlocscrewt
ksel,s,loc,x,b-lef
ksel,r,loc,y,h-ey
ksel,r,loc,z,zlocscrewt
*get,kpnr1t,kp,,num,max ![kpnr1t] = Keypoint number of a top screw
alls
k,,b,h-ey,zlocscrewt
ksel,s,loc,x,b
ksel,r,loc,y,h-ey
ksel,r,loc,z,zlocscrewt
*get,kpnr2t,kp,,num,max ![kpnr2t] = Keypoint number of another top screw
alls
l,kpnr1t,kpnr2t
lsel,s,loc,x,b-(lef/2)
lsel,r,loc,y,h-ey
lsel,r,loc,z,zlocscrewt
*get,screwnrt,line,,num,max ![screwnrt] = screw(line) number of a top screw
alls
!} !_________________________________________
!{ ! 1.7.3.3 "Pre"-Meshing
!-----------------------------------------
lesize,all,elx
alls
!} !_________________________________________
!{ ! 1.7.3.4 Meshing
!-----------------------------------------
type,3
mat,3
secnum,3
real,3
lmesh,screwnrt
alls
!} !_________________________________________
!{ ! 1.7.3.5 Connecting Screw and Metal Profile

!-----------------------------------------
esel,s,type,,3
nsle,s,all
nsel,r,loc,x,b
nsel,r,loc,y,h-ey
A-33
nsel,r,loc,z,zlocscrewt
*get,einsp_GS_oben,node,,num,max
![einsp_GS_oben] = Node number of a top screw in contact with steel
alls
esel,s,type,,2
nsle,s,all
nsel,r,loc,x,b
nsel,r,loc,y,h-ey
*get,einsp_SP_oben,node,,num,max
![einsp_SP_oben] = Node number of a the steel in contact with the top screw
alls
cerig,einsp_GS_oben,einsp_SP_oben,all
! Defines a rigid region, Master, Slave, All applicable degrees of freedom
alls
!} !_________________________________________
!{ ! 1.7.3.6 Centered Springs

!-----------------------------------------
eltypetc=6 ![eltypetc] = element type top centered springs
*do,j,6,8,1
esel,s,type,,3
esel,a,type,,1
nsle,s,all
nsel,r,loc,x,b-lef,b ! Select a new set, x location = from b-lef to b
nsel,r,loc,y,h-ey ! Reselect from fisrt set, y location = h-ey
nsel,r,loc,z,zlocscrewt ! Reselect
nsel,u,loc,x,b ! Unselect
nsel,u,loc,x,b-lef
type,eltypetc
! 6=Pulling Out Springs x-dicection,
! 7=Hole Bearing Springs (fh) y-dicection,
! 8=AHole Bearing Springs z-dicection
*if,eltypetc,EQ,6,then
real,30
*elseif,eltypetc,EQ,7
real,40
*elseif,eltypetc,EQ,8
real,50
*endif
eintf ! Defines two-node elements between coincident or offset nodes

alls
eltypetc=eltypetc+1
*enddo
!} !_________________________________________
!{ ! 1.7.3.7 Outer Springs

!-----------------------------------------
eltypeto1=6
*do,j,6,8,1 ! Left
esel,s,type,,3
A-34
esel,a,type,,1
nsle,s,all
nsel,r,loc,x,b-lef
nsel,r,loc,y,h-ey
type,eltypeto1
![6=Pulling Out Springs x-dicection,
! 8=AHole Bearing Springs z-dicection]
*if,eltypeto1,EQ,6,then
real,31
*elseif,eltypeto1,EQ,7
real,41
real,51
*endif
eintf
alls
eltypeto1=eltypeto1+1
*enddo
eltypeto2=6
*do,j,6,8,1 ! Right
esel,s,type,,3
esel,a,type,,1
nsle,s,all
nsel,r,loc,x,b
nsel,r,loc,y,h-ey
type,eltypeto2
*if,eltypeto2,EQ,6,then
real,31
real,41
real,51
*endif
eintf
alls
eltypeto2=eltypeto2+1
*enddo
!} !_________________________________________
zlocscrewt=zlocscrewt+pz !!!!!!!!!Preparing the new loop

*enddo !Ending the *DO Loop
!} !_____________________________________________________________________________________
!{ ! 1.7.4 Screws Bottom
A-35
!-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
!{ ! 1.7.4.1 Innicial Deffinitions

!-----------------------------------------
zlocscrewb=ez+(((l-2*ez)-num3*pz)/2)
![zlocscrewb] = z location of the bottom screw screw
!} !_________________________________________
!{ ! 1.7.4.2 Geometry
!-----------------------------------------
*do,i,1,nscrew,1
k,,b-lef,ey,zlocscrewb
ksel,s,loc,x,b-lef
ksel,r,loc,y,ey
ksel,r,loc,z,zlocscrewb
*get,kpnr1b,kp,,num,max !--- Getting the number of the selected keypont ---
alls
k,,b,ey,zlocscrewb
ksel,s,loc,x,b
ksel,r,loc,y,ey
ksel,r,loc,z,zlocscrewb
*get,kpnr2b,kp,,num,max !--- Getting the number of the selected keypont ---
alls
l,kpnr1b,kpnr2b
lsel,r,loc,y,ey
lsel,r,loc,z,zlocscrewb
*get,screwnrb,line,,num,max !--- Getting the number of the selected line ---
alls
!} !_________________________________________
!{ ! 1.7.4.3 "Pre"-Meshing
!-----------------------------------------
lesize,all,elx
alls
!} !_________________________________________
!{ ! 1.7.4.4 Meshing
!-----------------------------------------
type,3
mat,3
secnum,3
real,3
lmesh,screwnrb
alls
!} !_________________________________________
!{ ! 1.7.4.5 Connecting Screw and Metal Profile

!-----------------------------------------
esel,s,type,,3
nsle,s,all
nsel,r,loc,x,b
A-36
nsel,r,loc,y,ey
nsel,r,loc,z,zlocscrewb
*get,einsp_GS_unten,node,,num,max
!--- Getting rhe number of the screw node in contact with the steel---
alls
esel,s,type,,2
nsle,s,all
nsel,r,loc,x,b
nsel,r,loc,y,ey
*get,einsp_SP_unten,node,,num,max
!--- Getting the number of the steel node in contact with the bottom screw ---
alls
cerig,einsp_GS_unten,einsp_SP_unten,all
! Defines a rigid region, Master, Slave, All applicable degrees of freedom
alls
!} !_________________________________________
!{ ! 1.7.4.6 Centered Springs

!-----------------------------------------
eltypebc1=6 ![eltypebc1] = element type bottom centered springs
*do,j,6,8,1
esel,s,type,,3
esel,a,type,,1
nsle,s,all
nsel,r,loc,x,b-lef,b
nsel,r,loc,y,ey
nsel,u,loc,x,b
nsel,u,loc,x,b-lef
type,eltypebc1
*if,eltypebc1,EQ,6,then
real,30
*elseif,eltypebc1,EQ,7
real,40
*elseif,eltypebc1,EQ,8
real,50
*endif
eintf
alls
eltypebc1=eltypebc1+1
*enddo
!} !_________________________________________
!{ ! 1.7.4.7 Outer Springs

!-----------------------------------------
eltypebo1=6
*do,j,6,8,1 !Left
A-37
esel,s,type,,3
esel,a,type,,1
nsle,s,all
nsel,r,loc,x,b-lef
nsel,r,loc,y,ey
type,eltypebo1
*if,eltypebo1,EQ,6,then
real,31
*elseif,eltypebo1,EQ,7
real,41
real,51
*endif
eintf
alls
eltypebo1=eltypebo1+1
*enddo
eltypebo2=6
*do,j,6,8,1 !Right
esel,s,type,,3
esel,a,type,,1
nsle,s,all
nsel,r,loc,x,b
nsel,r,loc,y,ey
type,eltypebo2
*if,eltypebo2,EQ,6,then
real,31
real,41
real,51
*endif
eintf
alls
eltypebo2=eltypebo2+1
*enddo
!} !_________________________________________
zlocscrewb=zlocscrewb+pz !!!!!Preparing the new loop

*enddo
!} !_____________________________________________________________________________________
!} !_________________________________________________________________________________________
A-38
!_________________________________________________________________________________________
!{ ! 1.8 Contacts Wood-Metal Profile
!-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
!{ ! 1.8.1 Contact (Wood)

!-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
!Areas with x=b (vertical)
alls
asel,s,loc,x,b
asel,u,loc,y,h/2 ! Unselect
nsla,s,1 ! Selects those nodes associated with the selected areas.
esln,s,0 ! Selects those elements attached to the selected nodes
esel,r,type,,1
mat,4 ! Material #4 (contact)
real,4
type,4
esurf
alls
!Areas with x=b-bn (vertical)

asel,s,loc,x,b-bn
asel,r,loc,y,h/2
nsla,s,1
esln,s,0
esel,r,type,,1
mat,4
real,4
type,4
esurf
alls
!Areas with x=b-(bn/2) (horizontal)

asel,s,loc,x,b-(bn/2)
asel,r,loc,y,2*ht
nsla,s,1
esln,s,0
esel,r,type,,1
mat,4
real,4
type,4
esurf
alls

asel,r,loc,y,3*ht
nsla,s,1
esln,s,0
esel,r,type,,1
mat,4
real,4
type,4
esurf
A-39
alls
!} !_____________________________________________________________________________________
!{ ! 1.8.2 Target (Metal Profile)

!-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
!Areas with x=b (vertical)
alls
asel,s,loc,x,b
asel,u,loc,y,h/2 ! Unselect
nsla,s,1 ! Selects those nodes associated with the selected lines.
esln,s,0 ! Selects those elements attached to the selected nodes
esel,r,type,,2
type,5 ! --- Still working with material 4 and real constant 4 ---
esurf
alls
!Areas with x=b-bn (vertical)

asel,s,loc,x,b-bn
asel,r,loc,y,h/2
nsla,s,1
esln,s,0
esel,r,type,,2
type,5
esurf
alls

asel,r,loc,y,2*ht
nsla,s,1
esln,s,0
esel,r,type,,2
type,5
esurf
alls

asel,r,loc,y,3*ht
nsla,s,1
esln,s,0
esel,r,type,,2
type,5
esurf
alls
!} !_____________________________________________________________________________________
!} !_________________________________________________________________________________________
!_________________________________________________________________________________________
!{ ! 1.9 Support Conditions
!-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A-40
!Plane of Symmetry
nsel,s,loc,z,l
d,all,uz
d,all,rotx
alls
!Tenons in y direction bottom

nsel,s,loc,z,0 !-1 !,-lt
nsel,r,loc,x,bt/2,bt/2+bt
nsel,r,loc,y,0
d,all,uy
d,all,ux
alls
nsel,s,loc,z,-lt
nsel,r,loc,y,ht
d,all,uy
d,all,ux
alls

nsel,r,loc,x,2*bt/2+bt,2*bt/2+2*bt
nsel,r,loc,y,0
d,all,uy
d,all,ux
alls
nsel,s,loc,z,-lt
nsel,r,loc,y,ht
d,all,uy
d,all,ux
alls

nsel,r,loc,x,3*bt/2+2*bt,3*bt/2+3*bt
nsel,r,loc,y,0
d,all,uy
d,all,ux
alls
nsel,s,loc,z,-lt
nsel,r,loc,y,ht
d,all,uy
d,all,ux
alls
!Tenons in y direction middle

nsel,r,loc,y,2*ht
d,all,uy
d,all,ux
A-41
alls
nsel,s,loc,z,-lt
nsel,r,loc,y,3*ht
d,all,uy
d,all,ux
alls

nsel,r,loc,y,2*ht
d,all,uy
d,all,ux
alls
nsel,s,loc,z,-lt
nsel,r,loc,y,3*ht
d,all,uy
d,all,ux
alls

nsel,r,loc,y,2*ht
d,all,uy
d,all,ux
alls
nsel,s,loc,z,-lt
nsel,r,loc,y,3*ht
d,all,uy
d,all,ux
alls
!Tenons in y direction top

nsel,r,loc,y,4*ht
d,all,uy
d,all,ux
alls
nsel,s,loc,z,-lt
nsel,r,loc,y,5*ht
d,all,uy
d,all,ux
alls

nsel,r,loc,y,4*ht
A-42
d,all,uy
d,all,ux
alls
nsel,s,loc,z,-lt
nsel,r,loc,y,5*ht
d,all,uy
d,all,ux
alls

nsel,r,loc,y,4*ht
d,all,uy
d,all,ux
alls
nsel,s,loc,z,-lt
nsel,r,loc,y,5*ht
d,all,uy
d,all,ux
alls
!} !_________________________________________________________________________________________
!_________________________________________________________________________________________
!{ ! 1.10 Loads
!-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
!Load on the steel plate
esel,s,type,,2
nsle,s,1
nsel,r,loc,x,b+bs
nsel,r,loc,y,h/2
!f,all,fx,4860 !Wind Suction
!f,all,fx,-3240 !Wind Pressure
nsel,r,loc,z,100
f,all,fy,-11040 !Glass Load
!d,all,uy,-u !Displacement in y direction
!d,all,ux,u !Test, Screw pulling out
alls
!} !_________________________________________________________________________________________
!_________________________________________________________________________________________
!{ ! 1.11 Solution
!-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
/title,Herausziehen GS
! /title,Multiple Mortise-and-Tenon
/solu
antype,static ! Specifies the analysis type and restart status.

nlgeom,off ! off -Ignores large-deflection effects (small-deflection analysis)
A-43
solcontrol,on,on ! Aktiviert optimale Vorgaben für nichtlineare Lösungen,
!Überprüft den Kontaktstatus
lnsrch,auto
autots,off
nsubst,nsub,nsub,nsub ! Anzahl der Lastschritte
time,nsub
neqit,180 ! Maximale Anzahl an Iterationen
ncnv,0 ! 0-Führt Berechnung weiter, auch wenn keine Konvergenz vorliegt,
! 2-Beendet Berechnung wenn keine Konvergenz vorliegt
pred,on,,on ! Activates a predictor in a nonlinear analysis
rescontrol,define,all,1,1 ! Controls file writing for multiframe restarts
outpr,esol,1 !Controls the solution printout
outres,all,all
solve
gplot ! GPLOT Controls general plotting
!} !_________________________________________________________________________________________
!_________________________________________________________________________________________
!{ ! 1.12 Makros
!-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
!{ ! 1.12.1 Unselect Metal Profile and contact elemets

!-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*create,U_245,mac
alls
esel,u,type,,2
esel,u,type,,4
esel,u,type,,5
/replot
alls
*end
!} !_____________________________________________________________________________________
!{ ! 1.12.2 Axial Forces Screw

!-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*create,Axial_Screw,mac
/post1
esel,s,type,,3
etable,f1,smisc,1
etable,f2,smisc,14
plls,f1,f2
alls
*end
!} !_____________________________________________________________________________________
!{ ! 1.12.3 Shear Forces Screw

!-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*create,Y_Shear_Screw,mac
/post1
esel,s,type,,3
etable,f5,smisc,6
etable,f6,smisc,19
plls,f5,f6
alls
A-44
*end
*create,Z_Shear_Screw,mac
/post1
esel,s,type,,3
etable,f3,smisc,5
etable,f4,smisc,18
plls,f3,f4
alls
*end
!} !_____________________________________________________________________________________
!{ ! 1.12.4 Bending Moment Screw

!-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*create,Moment_Screw,mac
/post1
esel,s,type,,3
etable,m1,smisc,3
etable,m2,smisc,16
plls,m1,m2
alls
*end
!} !_____________________________________________________________________________________
!{ ! 1.12.5 Forces Springs

!-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*create,Spring_Fx,mac
/post1
esel,s,type,,6
etable,x_springs,smisc,1
plls,x_springs,x_springs,,1
alls
*end
*create,Spring_Fy,mac
/post1
esel,s,type,,7
etable,y_springs,smisc,1
plls,y_springs,y_springs,,1
alls
*end
*create,Spring_Fz,mac
/post1
esel,s,type,,8
etable,z_springs,smisc,1
plls,z_springs,z_springs,,1
alls
*end
!} !_____________________________________________________________________________________
!{ ! 1.12.6 Displacement Spring

!-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*create,Spring_Dy,mac
/post1
A-45
esel,s,type,,7
etable,dispy,nmisc,1
plls,dispy,dispy,,1
alls
*end
*create,Spring_Dz,mac
/post1
esel,s,type,,8
etable,dispz,nmisc,1
plls,dispz,dispz,,1
alls
*end
!} !_____________________________________________________________________________________
!{ ! 1.12.7 Sigma xx
!-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*create,Sigma_xx,mac
finish
/post1
rsys,0
alls
plnsol,s,x
*end
!} !_____________________________________________________________________________________
!{ ! 1.12.8 Sigma yy
!-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*create,Sigma_yy,mac
finish
/post1
rsys,0
alls
plnsol,s,y
*end
!} !_____________________________________________________________________________________
!{ ! 1.12.9 Macro zur Diagrammanzeige in einem Schnitt

!-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*create,sigma_x,mac
finish
/post1
alls
*ask,x_Schnitt,Abstand vom linken Rand?,b/2
path,Schnitt,2,30,100 ! Def. von Pfad
ppath,1,,x_Schnitt,0 ! 1. Punkt für Pfad
ppath,2,,x_Schnitt,h ! 2. Punkt für Pfad
pdef,S_xx,s,x,avg ! Schubspannung wird auf Pfad interpoliert
plpath,S_xx ! Ausgabe in Diagamm
*end
!} !_____________________________________________________________________________________
!{ ! 1.12.10 Path 1
!-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*create,Schnitt1_sx,mac
A-46
finish
/post1
alls
! *ask,x_Schnitt,Abstand vom linken Rand?,b/2
path,Schnitt1,2,30,100 ! Def. von Pfad
ppath,1,,b,h,0 ! 1. Punkt für Pfad
ppath,2,,0,h,0 ! 2. Punkt für Pfad
*end
!} !_____________________________________________________________________________________
!{ ! 1.12.11 Path 2
!-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*create,Schnitt2_sy,mac
finish
/post1
alls
ppath,1,,b,(2*h)/5,0 ! 1. Punkt für Pfad
ppath,2,,0,(2*h)/5,0 ! 2. Punkt für Pfad
pdef,S_yy,s,y,avg ! Schubspannung wird auf Pfad interpoliert
plpath,S_yy ! Ausgabe in Diagamm
*end
!} !_____________________________________________________________________________________
!{ ! 1.12.12 Path 3
!-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*create,Schnitt3_sx,mac
finish
/post1
alls
ppath,1,,b-bst,h,l ! 1. Punkt für Pfad
ppath,2,,b-bst,h,0 ! 2. Punkt für Pfad
*end
!} !_____________________________________________________________________________________
!{ ! 1.12.13 Path 4
!-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*create,Schnitt4_sy,mac
finish
/post1
alls
ppath,1,,b-bn,(2*h)/5,l ! 1. Punkt für Pfad
ppath,2,,b-bn,(2*h)/5,0 ! 2. Punkt für Pfad
pdef,S_yy,s,y,avg ! Schubspannung wird auf Pfad interpoliert
plpath,S_yy ! Ausgabe in Diagamm
*end
A-47
!} !_____________________________________________________________________________________
!{ ! 1.12.14 Macro to show the xx stresses in the wood allong a screw

!-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*create,screw_path,mac
finish
/post1
alls
*ask,ydist,Distance from the lower edge?,h-ey
*ask,zdist,Distance from the front edge?,l/2
path,Schnitt,2,30,100 ! Def. von Pfad
ppath,1,,b-lef,ydist,zdist ! 1. Punkt für Pfad
ppath,2,,b,ydist,zdist ! 2. Punkt für Pfad
pdef,S_xx,s,y,avg ! Schubspannung wird auf Pfad interpoliert
alls
*end
!} !_____________________________________________________________________________________
!} !_________________________________________________________________________________________
!_________________________________________________________________________________________
!{ ! 1.13 Menu Buttons
!-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*abbr,U_245,U_245 ! Defines an abbreviation *ABBR, Abbr, String
*abbr,Screw_Fx,Axial_Screw
*abbr,Screw_Fy,Y_Shear_Screw
*abbr,Screw_My,Moment_Screw
*abbr,Spring_Fx,Spring_Fx
*abbr,Spring_Fy,Spring_Fy
*abbr,Spring_Fz,Spring_Fz
*abbr,Spring_Dy,Spring_Dy
*abbr,Spring_Dz,Spring_Dz
*abbr,Sig xx,Sigma_xx
*abbr,Sig yy,Sigma_yy
*abbr,sigma_x,sigma_x
*abbr,1sx,Schnitt1_sx
*abbr,2sy,Schnitt2_sy
*abbr,3sx,Schnitt3_sx
*abbr,4sy,Schnitt4_sy
*abbr,Screw_path,screw_path
abbsav,all,makros,abbr ! Writes the current abbreviation set to a coded file

abbres,new,makros,abbr ! Reads abbreviations from a coded file
!} !_________________________________________________________________________________________
/eof
A-48

Dissertação Philip - Steinhausen N.62971

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Dissertação Philip - Steinhausen N.62971

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Study of the Structural Behaviour of the

Connections between Mullions and

Thesis to obtain the Master of Science Degree in

Integrated Master Degree (MSc) in Civil

Lisboa, 25th June 2013

Keywords: Beech, Connection, Facade, Glass, Glulam, Mortise, Mullion,

Palavras-chave: Estrutura, Fachada, Faia, Ligação, Ligação macho- fêmea, Madeira,

Neste trabalho é analisado o comportamento estrutural de ligações entre montantes e

2 Structure of the thesis 2

4 State of the art 7

6 Finite element model 31

7 Simplified model for stress assessment 39

Appendix A Statics A-1

Appendix B Design resistance to dead loads A-5

Appendix C Preliminary test set-up A-7

Appendix D Orthotropy A-8

Appendix E Test results A-11

Appendix F APDL Source code A-24

CNC Computerized Numerically Controlled

Latin lower case letters

ag Distance between transom and glass pane

A Failure zone: above of the first tenon

Greek lower case letters

γD35 Volumetric weight of wood of strength class D35

The additional subscript [d ] refers to a design value.

Figure 1: Interior view of a wood-glass facade with mullion-transom structure

2 Structure of the thesis

3.1 Current wood-glass facades

A wood-glass facade is a mullion-transom structure. The vertical elements are called

3.2.1 Beech wood

3.2.2 Glued laminated timber (Glulam)

3.3 Forest management in the recent past and its implications

It is further stated that:

3.4 Possible market for beech wood

Figure 4: Distribution of tree species in Germany (Second National Forest Inven-

4.1 Mullion-transom connection systems

4.1.1 Plugged connection systems

(a) Walter Lang mullion-transom connec- (b) Seufert-Niklaus mullion-transom con-

Figure 5: Examples of plugged-in connection systems.

Figure 6: Plugged connection system.

4.1.2 Slide-in connection systems

(a) Knapp RICON connection system (b) RAICO mullion-transom connec-

Figure 7: Examples of slide-in connection systems.

Figure 8: Slide-in connection system.

• The screws are subjected to shear;

Figure 9: Locking clip (KNAPP GmbH, 2012a, p. 2).

4.1.3 Combined connection systems

Figure 10: Examples of combined connection systems.

Bglass in mm 3000 3000 6000

Connection system Design strength for dead loads in kN

4.3 Preliminary tests

Glass load Holes for steel bolts

Figure 11: Beech wood transom cross-section with multiple mortise-and-tenon

Figure 12: Details of a wood-glass facade.

Table 3: Results of tests with multiple mortise-and-tenon joints.

Table 4: Experimental loads that were carried by different connection systems.

Experimental strength (dead loads)

5.1.1 Beech glulam

• Terokal 221, that is a solvent-free, two-component, epoxy adhesive produced by

• Loctite 9483, that is a general purpose, two-component, epoxy adhesive produced

• MC-Quicksolid, that is a solvent-free, two-component, polyurethane adhesive pro-

• Macroplast UK8103, that is a general purpose, two-component, polyurethane adhe-

• Macroplast UR7225, that is a structural bonding, one-component, polyurethane