Innovative Approach for Enhancing GLULAM Performance with Reinforcing Steel Bars: A BESO-based Study

Vito Junior, Artur Fernando de; Vicente, William Martins

doi:10.1590/1679-78257558

Cited by 1 publication

(2 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the scientific literature, we can find many studies on the reinforcement of full-length LVL members with composite or steel bars as well as with mats, tapes, etc. [12]. LVL already has high strength and very high mechanical properties, which is very beneficial for many design solutions.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…CLT is created by rotating the direction of the fibers relative to the adjacent layers by approximately 90 degrees. It is made of engineered wood and widely used in construction in the USA, Canada, Europe, and Asia [12][13][14]. It should be noted that the cost of glulam and CLT is higher than steel or concrete, but they are still low-density materials that allow significant savings in transport and foundations.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Load and Deformation Analysis in Experimental and Numerical Studies of Full-Size Wooden Beams Reinforced with Prestressed FRP and Steel Bars

Wdowiak-Postulak,

Gocál,

Bahleda

et al. 2023

Applied Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The use of composite precast or steel bars as reinforcements for timber beams is an important technique that can improve effectiveness or allow cross sections to be reduced. This paper presents experimental, theoretical, and numerical studies of full-size timber beams measuring 82 × 162 × 3650 mm3 using prestressed steel bars and 10 mm diameter basalt and glass bars with a prestress of 10 MPa. In addition, parametric studies were carried out using FEM numerical simulations. In the experimental tests, an increase in load-bearing capacity and stiffness of up to 58% and 10.7% for steel bars, 32% and 10.1% for basalt bars, and 27% and 7.8% for glass bars, respectively, was obtained compared to unreinforced beams. The different levels of improvement in reinforcement efficiency was also related to the different elastic modulus of the reinforcement itself. Unreinforced beams showed a linear elastic range. In contrast, on beams reinforced with steel bars, the curve had a slightly steeper line than the control beam, and the slope of the curve then decreased when a certain load was reached. All beams failed when the lower wood fibers reached maximum tensile strain. The allowable compressive strain then decreased by 36.6% for basalt bars, 32.9% for glass bars, and 30.4% for steel bars. The use of prestressing further exploited the strength of the reinforcement beyond the yield point. All unreinforced beams primarily failed in the tension zone due to fracture of the timber fibers. Prestressed and reinforced beams were already failing due to bending and shear. The experimental and numerical analysis was also compared, and the results showed a good agreement and a maximum difference of approximately 5.7%.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%