Upload
others
View
3
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Nail, Wood Screw, andStaple Fastener Connections
Fernando S. FonsecaSterling K. Rose
Scott H. Campbell
Brigham Young University
2002
CUREE Publication No. W-16
The CUREE-Caltech Woodframe Project is funded by the Federal Emergency Management Agency(FEMA) through a Hazard Mitigation Grant Program award administered by the CaliforniaGovernor’s Office of Emergency Services (OES) and is supported by non-Federal sources fromindustry, academia, and state and local government. California Institute of Technology (Caltech)is the prime contractor to OES. The Consortium of Universities for Research in EarthquakeEngineering (CUREE) organizes and carries out under subcontract to Caltech the tasks involv-ing other universities, practicing engineers, and industry.
the CUREE-Caltech Woodframe Project
CUREE
Disclaimer
The information in this publication is presented as apublic service by California Institute of Technology andthe Consortium of Universities for Research in EarthquakeEngineering. No liability for the accuracy or adequacy ofthis information is assumed by them, nor by the FederalEmergency Management Agency and the CaliforniaGovernor’s Office of Emergency Services, which providefunding for this project.
CUREE Publication No. W-16
Nail, Wood Screw, andStaple Fastener Connections
Fernando S. FonsecaSterling K. Rose
Scott H. Campbell
Brigham Young UniversityProvo, Utah
CUREEConsortium of Universities for Research in Earthquake Engineering
1301 S. 46th StreetRichmond, CA 94804
tel.: 510-665-3529 fax: 510-665-3622email: [email protected] website: www.curee.org
2002
ISBN 1-931995-07-9
First Printing: August 2002
Printed in the United States of America
Published byConsortium of Universities for Research in Earthquake Engineering (CUREE)1301 S. 46th Street - Richmond, CA 94804-4600www.curee.org (CUREE Worldwide Website)
CUREE
Preface | iii
Preface
The CUREE-Caltech Woodframe Project originated in the need for a combined research and implementation project to improve the seismic performance of woodframe buildings, a need which was brought to light by the January 17, 1994 Northridge, California Earthquake in the Los Angeles metropolitan region. Damage to woodframe construction predominated in all three basic categories of earthquake loss in that disaster:
Casualties: 24 of the 25 fatalities in the Northridge Earthquake that were caused by building damage occurred in woodframe buildings (1);
Property Loss: Half or more of the $40 billion in property damage was due to damage to woodframe construction (2);
Functionality: 48,000 housing units, almost all of them in woodframe buildings, were rendered uninhabitable by the earthquake (3).
Woodframe construction represents one of society’s largest investments in the built environment, and the common woodframe house is usually an individual’s largest single asset. In California, 99% of all residences are of woodframe construction, and even considering occupancies other than residential, such as commercial and industrial uses, 96% of all buildings in Los Angeles County are built of wood. In other regions of the country, woodframe construction is still extremely prevalent, constituting, for example, 89% of all buildings in Memphis, Tennessee and 87% in Wichita, Kansas, with "the general range of the fraction of wood structures to total structures...between 80% and 90% in all regions of the US….” (4). Funding for the Woodframe Project is provided primarily by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) under the Stafford Act (Public Law 93-288). The federal funding comes to the project through a California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services (OES) Hazard Mitigation Grant Program award to the California Institute of Technology (Caltech). The Project Manager is Professor John Hall of Caltech. The Consortium of Universities for Research in Earthquake Engineering (CUREE), as subcontractor to Caltech, with Robert Reitherman as Project Director, manages the subcontracted work to various universities, along with the work of consulting engineers, government agencies, trade groups, and others. CUREE is a non-profit corporation devoted to the advancement of earthquake engineering research, education, and implementation. Cost-sharing contributions to the Project come from a large number of practicing engineers, universities, companies, local and state agencies, and others. The project has five main Elements, which together with a management element are designed to make the engineering of woodframe buildings more scientific and their construction technology more efficient. The project’s Elements and their managers are:
1. Testing and Analysis: Prof. André Filiatrault, University of California, San Diego, Manager; Prof. Frieder Seible and Prof. Chia-Ming Uang, Assistant Managers
2. Field Investigations: Prof. G. G. Schierle, University of Southern California, Manager
3. Building Codes and Standards: Kelly Cobeen, GFDS Engineers, Manager; John Coil and James Russell, Assistant Managers
4. Economic Aspects: Tom Tobin, Tobin Associates, Manager
5. Education and Outreach: Jill Andrews, Southern California Earthquake Center, Manager
iv | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
The Testing and Analysis Element of the CUREE-Caltech Woodframe Project consists of 23 different investigations carried out by 16 different organizations (13 universities, three consulting engineering firms). This tabulation includes an independent but closely coordinated project conducted at the University of British Columbia under separate funding than that which the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has provided to the Woodframe Project. Approximately half the total $6.9 million budget of the CUREE-Caltech Woodframe Project is devoted to its Testing and Analysis tasks, which is the primary source of new knowledge developed in the Project.
Woodframe Project Testing and Analysis Investigations
Task # Investigator Topic
Project-Wide Topics and System-level Experiments
1.1.1 André Filiatrault, UC San Diego
Kelly Cobeen, GFDS Engineers
Two-Story House (testing, analysis)
Two-Story House (design)
1.1.2 Khalid Mosalam, Stephen Mahin, UC Berkeley Bret Lizundia, Rutherford & Chekene
Three-Story Apt. Building (testing, analysis) Three-Story Apt. Building (design)
1.1.3 Frank Lam et al., U. of British Columbia Multiple Houses (independent project funded separately in Canada with liaison to CUREE-Caltech Project)
1.2 Bryan Folz, UC San Diego International Benchmark (analysis contest)
1.3.1 Chia-Ming Uang, UC San Diego Rate of Loading and Loading Protocol Effects
1.3.2 Helmut Krawinkler, Stanford University Testing Protocol
1.3.3 James Beck, Caltech Dynamic Characteristics
Component-Level Investigations
1.4.1.1 James Mahaney; Wiss, Janney, Elstner Assoc. Anchorage (in-plane wall loads)
1.4.1.2 Yan Xiao, University of Southern California Anchorage (hillside house diaphragm tie-back)
1.4.2 James Dolan, Virginia Polytechnic Institute Diaphragms
1.4.3 Rob Chai, UC Davis Cripple Walls
1.4.4.4 Gerard Pardoen, UC Irvine Shearwalls
1.4.6 Kurt McMullin, San Jose State University Wall Finish Materials (lab testing)
1.4.6 Gregory Deierlein, Stanford University Wall Finish Materials (analysis)
1.4.7 Michael Symans, Washington State University Energy-Dissipating Fluid Dampers
1.4.8.1 Fernando Fonseca, Brigham Young University Nail and Screw Fastener Connections
1.4.8.2 Kenneth Fridley, Washington State University Inter-Story Shear Transfer Connections
1.4.8.3 Gerard Pardoen, UC Irvine Shearwall-Diaphragm Connections
Analytical Investigations
1.5.1 Bryan Folz, UC San Diego Analysis Software Development
1.5.2 Helmut Krawinkler, Stanford University Demand Aspects
1.5.3 David Rosowsky, Oregon State University Reliability of Shearwalls
Preface | v
Not shown in the tabulation is the essential task of managing this element of the Project to keep the numerous investigations on track and to integrate the results. The lead management role for the Testing and Analysis Element has been carried out by Professor André Filiatrault, along with Professor Chia-Ming Uang and Professor Frieder Seible, of the Department of Structural Engineering at the University of California at San Diego. The type of construction that is the subject of the investigation reported in this document is typical “two-by-four” frame construction as developed and commonly built in the United States. (Outside the scope of this Project are the many kinds of construction in which there are one or more timber components, but which cannot be described as having a timber structural system, e.g., the roof of a typical concrete tilt-up building). In contrast to steel, masonry, and concrete construction, woodframe construction is much more commonly built under conventional (i.e., non-engineered) building code provisions. Also notable is the fact that even in the case of engineered wood buildings, structural engineering analysis and design procedures, as well as building code requirements, are more based on traditional practice and experience than on precise methods founded on a well-established engineering rationale. Dangerous damage to US woodframe construction has been rare, but there is still considerable room for improvement. To increase the effectiveness of earthquake-resistant design and construction with regard to woodframe construction, two primary aims of the Project are:
1. Make the design and analysis more scientific, i.e., more directly founded on experimentally and theoretically validated engineering methods and more precise in the resulting quantitative results.
2. Make the construction more efficient, i.e., reduce construction or other costs where possible,
increasing seismic performance while respecting the practical aspects associated with this type of construction and its associated decentralized building construction industry.
The initial planning for the Testing and Analysis tasks evolved from a workshop that was primarily devoted to obtaining input from practitioners (engineers, building code officials, architects, builders) concerning questions to which they need answers if they are to implement practical ways of reducing earthquake losses in their work. (Frieder Seible, André Filiatrault, and Chia-Ming Uang, Proceedings of the Invitational Workshop on Seismic Testing, Analysis and Design of Woodframe Construction, CUREE Publication No. W-01, 1999.) As the Testing and Analysis tasks reported in this CUREE report series were undertaken, each was assigned a designated role in providing results that would support the development of improved codes and standards, engineering procedures, or construction practices, thus completing the circle back to practitioners. The other elements of the Project essential to that overall process are briefly described below. To readers unfamiliar with structural engineering research based on laboratory work, the term “testing” may have a too narrow a connotation. Only in limited cases did investigations carried out in this Project “put to the test” a particular code provision or construction feature to see if it “passed the test.” That narrow usage of “testing” is more applicable to the certification of specific models and brands of products to declare their acceptability under a particular product standard. In this Project, more commonly the experimentation produced a range of results that are used to calibrate analytical models, so that relatively expensive laboratory research can be applicable to a wider array of conditions than the single example that was subjected to simulated earthquake loading. To a non-engineering bystander, a “failure” or “unacceptable damage” in a specimen is in fact an instance of successful experimentation if it provides a valid set of data that builds up the basis for quantitatively predicting how wood components and systems of a wide variety will perform under real earthquakes. Experimentation has also been conducted to improve the starting point for this kind of research: To better define what specific kinds of simulation in the laboratory best represent the real conditions of actual buildings subjected to earthquakes, and to develop protocols that ensure data are produced that serve the analytical needs of researchers and design engineers.
vi | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
Notes (1) EQE International and the Governor’s Office of Emergency Services, The Northridge Earthquake of January
17, 1994: Report of Data Collection and Analysis, Part A, p. 5-18 (Sacramento, CA: Office of Emergency Services, 1995).
(2) Charles Kircher, Robert Reitherman, Robert Whitman, and Christopher Arnold, “Estimation of Earthquake
Losses to Buildings,” Earthquake Spectra, Vol. 13, No. 4, November 1997, p. 714, and Robert Reitherman, “Overview of the Northridge Earthquake,” Proceedings of the NEHRP Conference and Workshop on Research on the Northridge, California Earthquake of January 17, 1994, Vol. I, p. I-1 (Richmond, CA: California Universities for Research in Earthquake Engineering, 1998).
(3) Jeanne B. Perkins, John Boatwright, and Ben Chaqui, “Housing Damage and Resulting Shelter Needs: Model
Testing and Refinement Using Northridge Data,” Proceedings of the NEHRP Conference and Workshop on Research on the Northridge, California Earthquake of January 17, 1994, Vol. IV, p. IV-135 (Richmond, CA: California Universities for Research in Earthquake Engineering, 1998).
(4) Ajay Malik, Estimating Building Stocks for Earthquake Mitigation and Recovery Planning, Cornell Institute for
Social and Economic Research, 1995.
Preface | vii
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank FEMA for providing funding through the California OES and the Civil and Environmental Engineering Department at Brigham Young University for providing matching funds for this research project. Thanks to Mr. Robert Reitherman, CUREE Executive Director for coordinating the overall project. Thanks to Professor John Hall (California Institute of Technology), manager of the CUREE-Caltech Woodframe Project; Professors André Filiatrault, Frieder Seible and Chia-Ming Uang (University of California, San Diego), managers of the Testing and Analysis element; and Ms. Kelly Cobeen (GFDS Engineers), Mr. John Coil (Thoron-Tomassetti / Coil & Welsh), and Mr. James Russell, managers of the Building Codes and Standards element for their guidance, support, and comments throughout this research task. Thanks to Professor James Beck and Ms. Vanessa Camelo (California Institute of Technology); Professor Rob Chai and Mrs. Tara Hutchinson (Univesity of California, Davis); Professors William Cofer, Ken Fridley, and Michael Symans (Washington State University); Professor Greg Deierlein and Helmut Krawingler (Stanford University); Professor Dan Dolan (Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University); Mr. Seb Ficadente (F&W Inc.); Dr. Bryan Folz (University of California, San Diego); Professor Frank Lam (University of British Columbia); Mr. Philip Line (American Forest & Paper Association); Mr. James Mahaney (WJE Associates); Professor Kurt McMullin (San Jose State University); Professor Khalid Mosalam (University of California, Berkeley); Professor Gerry Pardon (University of California, Irvine); Mr. Steve Pryor (Simpson Strong-Tie); Professor David Rosowsky (Oregon State University); Professor Yan Xiao (University of Southern California) for their many questions, comments, suggestions, and assistance during and after each research meeting. Thanks to Mr. Tom Skaggs (APA–The Engineering Wood Association); Mr. Ed Diekmann; Mr. John Kurtz (ISANTA); and Ms. Kelly Cobeen (GFDS Engineers) for providing some of the materials used in the testing program. Also, Mr. Darius Campbell for donating the staples and staple gun. Thanks to Mr. Justin Rabe, a former graduate student in the Civil and Engineering Department at Brigham Young University, for designing and constructing the testing apparatus. Also, Curt McDonald, Paul Lattin, and Holly Rose graduate students that assisted during assembling and testing. Thanks to Mr. David Anderson, the technician in the Civil and Environmental Engineering Department at Brigham Young University, for his assistance during initial setup and data acquisition.
viii | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
Preface | ix
Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
Fernando S. Fonseca, Ph.D., P.E.
Brigham Young University Provo, Utah
Sterling K. Rose and Scott H. Campbell
Brigham Young University Provo, Utah
Summary
Testing of several sheathing-to-wood connection types in lateral bearing under fully reversed
cyclic loading was conducted under Task 1.4.8.1 - Nail, Wood Screw and Staple Fastener
Connections. Task 1.4.8.1 is one of the tasks of the Testing and Analysis element of the
CUREE-Caltech Woodframe Project. The purpose of the testing was to obtain load-slip curves
for each connection type so that a database could be compiled. The database consists of a set of
ten parameters for each connection type. For each connection type, a group of ten specimens
were tested. The parameters were extracted from the load-slip curve of each specimen and
averaged for the ten specimens of each group. The database will be integrated into the 3-
Dimensional Seismic Analysis Software for Woodframe Construction developed in Task 1.5.1 -
Analysis Software.
Specimens were assembled by attaching a piece of sheathing panel to a wood member. Different
thicknesses of oriented strand board and plywood were used as sheathing panels. All specimens
were assembled using the same type of wood member except two test groups. Several types and
sizes of nails, wood screws, and staples were used as fasteners to attach the sheathing panel to the
wood member. Specimens were assembled such that load could be applied perpendicular and
parallel to the grain of the wood member. To characterize the materials used, the density of the
oriented strand boards was obtained, the moisture content of the wood members was measured,
and the bending yield strength of the fasteners was determined.
A fixture was designed and constructed for the testing of the specimens. The design was aimed
at making the fixture easy to use and more efficient without compromising the results. The main
advantage of the fixture is the clamping system that allows for quick setup. The clamps are also
beneficial because they provide a consistent clamping force. There are no bolts to be tightened,
so forces applied by the clamps to secure the specimen during testing are similar from test to test.
As a specimen was tested, however, the sheathing panel came in contact with parts of the fixture.
A study was therefore conducted to determine the magnitude of the friction between the
sheathing panel and the fixture. Study results indicate that the friction between the specimen and
the fixture is negligible.
x | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
Testing was accomplished using the simplified basic loading history developed in Task 1.3.2 -
Testing Protocol. A study was conducted to determine , which is the reference deformation that
defines the variations in deformation amplitude of the loading history. Concurrently, a study was
conducted involving the recommended loading histories that may represent the seismic demands
imposed on the connections due to ordinary ground motion. The simplified basic loading history
was selected because there were no significant differences between the behavior of the tested
specimens and because the extraction of the database parameters from the load-slip curves would
be significantly simpler without compromising the results. A reference deformation value was
determined for each of the three types of connectors to be tested. The frequency for testing all
specimens was 0.5 Hz.
Testing was conducted on an INSTRON universal testing machine. The testing machine was
controlled by the MTS Teststar II software, which has data acquisition features. Connector slip
was measured by two-cable extension linear position transducers mounted at the base of the
testing apparatus. To measure the applied load, a load cell was installed between the testing
machine and the testing apparatus. Data were recorded at a rate of 20 points per second.
A data reduction program was written to extract the database parameters from the load-slip
curves. Ten parameters are required for modeling the hysteretic behavior of the connections in
the analysis software developed in Task 1.5.1. The program extracted the parameters for each
load-slip curve, which were then averaged for the ten curves for each connection group. The
parameters and , which represent the strength degradation and stiffness degradation,
respectively, within cycles of same displacement amplitude were maintained constant. A
parametric study was conducted using and ; the results show that the model was not sensitive
to either one of them. The study showed that a value of 0.6 for and a value of 1.1 for would
yield satisfactorily result.
The database was assembled and is available from CUREE on a CD-Rom. The CD-Rom was set
up with a data viewer and contains a simple search engine. The parameters for each connection
group as well as the parameters for each specimen tested are presented in a tabular form. In
addition, the measured data of each test, a picture of each specimen taken right after completion
of the test, and the mode of failure of each specimen are included in the data viewer.
Furthermore, the data viewer includes theoretical strength values for each connection type. The
data viewer is expandable and can be updated to include data from existing as well as future
sheathing-to-wood connection tests.
Table of Contents | xi
Table of Contents
Preface................................................................................................................................ iii
Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................... vii
Summary ............................................................................................................................ ix
Table of Contents ............................................................................................................... xi
Index of Figures ................................................................................................................ xii
Index of Tables ................................................................................................................ xiv
Introduction ..........................................................................................................................1
Specimens ............................................................................................................................2
Test Matrix ...........................................................................................................................3
Materials and Material Properties ........................................................................................4
Sheathing Panels ............................................................................................................4
Wood Members ..............................................................................................................5
Fasteners ........................................................................................................................8
Specimen Assembly ...........................................................................................................11
Testing Setup .....................................................................................................................13
Testing Apparatus ........................................................................................................13
Load Cell ......................................................................................................................14
Position Transducers ....................................................................................................14
Testing Machine...........................................................................................................15
Data Acquisition ..........................................................................................................15
Loading Protocol ................................................................................................................16
Determination of the Reference Deformation ∆ ..........................................................16
Reference Deformation for Nails .................................................................................17
Reference Deformation for Wood Screws ...................................................................19
Reference Deformation for Staples ..............................................................................20
Loading Rate ................................................................................................................21
Preliminary Studies ............................................................................................................22
Loading History ...........................................................................................................22
Friction .........................................................................................................................23
Simple Analysis .................................................................................................................25
Data Reduction and Viewer ...............................................................................................26
Stiffness and Strength Degradation Parameters ...........................................................28
Load-Slip Curves .........................................................................................................29
Data Viewer .................................................................................................................29
References ..........................................................................................................................31
xii | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
Index of Figures
Figure 1: Typical Specimens .............................................................................................80
Figure 2: Schematic Representation of the Specimens. .....................................................81
Figure 3: Type and Thickness of Sheathing Panels ...........................................................82
Figure 4: Wood Member ....................................................................................................83
Figure 5: Fasteners .............................................................................................................84
Figure 6: Fastener Edge Distance ......................................................................................85
Figure 7: Fastener Driven Depths ......................................................................................86
Figure 8: Stamps on Sheathing Panels ...............................................................................87
Figure 9: Moisture Box ......................................................................................................88
Figure 10: Moisture Meter .................................................................................................89
Figure 11: Specimens Drying. ...........................................................................................90
Figure 12: Time Required for Specimens to Achieve a Dry Condition. ...........................91
Figure 13: Testing Apparatus for Determining Bending Yield Strength of Fasteners. .....92
Figure 14: Bending Yield Strength Test in Progress .........................................................93
Figure 15: Typical Load-Slip Response of a Fastener to the
Bending Yield Strength Test ........................................................................94
Figure 16: Locations Along a Screw Where the
Bending Yield Strength Can Be Determined ...............................................95
Figure 17: Specimen Assembly Apparatus ........................................................................96
Figure 18: Punches for Nails..............................................................................................97
Figure 19: Punches for Staples ..........................................................................................98
Figure 20: Testing Apparatus.............................................................................................99
Figure 21: Testing Apparatus Parts..................................................................................100
Figure 22: Frictionless Rolling System............................................................................102
Figure 23: Testing Apparatus Load Cell ..........................................................................103
Figure 24: Testing Apparatus String Pots ........................................................................104
Figure 25: Overall Testing Setup .....................................................................................105
Figure 26: Simplified Basic Loading History ..................................................................106
Figure 27: Typical Monotonic Load-Slip Response of a Specimen ................................107
Figure 28: Typical Perpendicular Specimen with an Offset Fastener .............................108
Figure 29: Typical Perpendicular Specimen with a Center Fastener ...............................109
Figure 30: Typical Parallel Specimen with a Center Fastener .........................................110
Figure 31: Load-Slip Response to the Simplified Basic Loading History,
Perpendicular ∆=0.17 in ...........................................................................111
Figure 32: Load-Slip Response to the Simplified Basic Loading History,
Perpendicular ∆=0.20 in ...........................................................................114
Figure 33: Load-Slip Response to the Simplified Basic Loading History,
Parallel ∆=0.17 in .....................................................................................116
Figure 34: Load-Slip Response to the Simplified Basic Loading History,
Parallel ∆=0.20 in .....................................................................................119
Figure 35: Load-Slip Response to the Simplified Basic Loading History,
Perpendicular ∆=0.12 in ...........................................................................121
Index of Figures | xiii
Figure 36: Load-Slip Response to the Simplified Basic Loading History,
Perpendicular ∆=0.17 in ...........................................................................123
Figure 37: Load-Slip Response to the Simplified Basic Loading History,
Specimen with Staple, Perpendicular ∆=0.17 in .......................................124
Figure 38: Load-Slip Response to the Simplified Basic Loading History,
Specimen with Staple, Perpendicular ∆=0.20 in .......................................125
Figure 39: Load-Slip Response to the Simplified Basic Loading History,
Specimen with Staple, Parallel ∆=0.17 in .................................................126
Figure 40: Loading Rate Corresponding to Loading Frequency .....................................127
Figure 41: Load-Slip Response to the Basic Loading History,
Perpendicular ∆=0.17 in ...........................................................................129
Figure 42: Load-Slip Response to the Simplified Basic Loading History,
Perpendicular ∆=0.17 in ...........................................................................133
Figure 43: Rolling System and Sources of Friction .........................................................136
Figure 44: Testing Apparatus Setup for Friction Study ...................................................137
Figure 45: Load-Slip Response to the Simplified Basic Loading History,
Perpendicular ∆=0.17 in ...........................................................................139
Figure 46: Load-Slip Response for Connection Type No.03 ..........................................140
Figure 47: Load-Slip Response for Connection Type No.47 ..........................................145
Figure 48: Average Results for Connections Type No.03 and 47 ...................................150
Figure 49: Parameters for Modeling Load-Slip Curves ...................................................151
Figure 50: Range Used for Extraction of Initial Stiffness Parameter ..............................152
Figure 51: Range Used for Extraction of Parameter r1 and F1 ........................................153
Figure 52: Range Used for Extraction of Parameter r2 ....................................................154
Figure 53: Range Used for Extraction of Parameter r3 ....................................................155
Figure 54: Range Used for Extraction of Parameter r4 and F1 ........................................156
Figure 55: Sensitivity of a Load-Slip Curve to the Stiffness Degradation Parameter .....157
Figure 56: The Measured and the Calculated Load-Slip Curve for a Nail Specimen .....158
Figure 57: The Measured and the Calculated Load-Slip Curve for a
Wood Screw Specimen ..............................................................................159
Figure 58: The Measured and the Calculated Load-Slip Curve for a Staple Specimen ..160
Figure 59: The Measured and the Average Calculated Load-Slip Curve for a
Nail Specimen ............................................................................................161
xiv | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
Index of Tables
Table 1: Test Matrix...........................................................................................................34
Table 2: Sheathing Panel Manufacturers ...........................................................................40
Table 3: Density of the Oriented Strand Board Sheathing Panels .....................................41
Table 4: Lumber Moisture Content at Assembly ..............................................................43
Table 5: Lumber Moisture Content at Testing ...................................................................45
Table 6: Results of the Study Validating the Moisture Meter. ..........................................53
Table 7: Lumber Moisture Content at Assembly (Corrected). ..........................................54
Table 8: Lumber Moisture Content at Testing (Corrected). ..............................................56
Table 9: Dimensions of the Fasteners. ...............................................................................64
Table 10: Nail Bending Yield Strength .............................................................................65
Table 11: Wood Screw Bending Yield Strength ................................................................66
Table 12: Reference Deformations ....................................................................................67
Table 13: Monotonic Loading Results for Perpendicular Loaded Specimens
Assembled with Nails ...................................................................................68
Table 14: Monotonic Loading Results for Parallel Loaded Specimens
Assembled with Nails ...................................................................................69
Table 15: Monotonic Loading Results for Perpendicular Loaded Specimens
Assembled with Screws ................................................................................70
Table 16: Monotonic Loading Results for Perpendicular Loaded Specimens
Assembled with Staples ................................................................................71
Table 17: Property Summary for the Basic Loading History Connection Type ................72
Table 18: Property Summary for the Simplified Basic Loading History
Connection Type ...........................................................................................73
Table 19: Variable and Property Summary for Connection Type No.03 ..........................74
Table 20: Variable and Property Summary for Connection Type No.47 ..........................76
Introduction | 1
Introduction
The objective of the CUREE-Caltech Woodframe Project is to significantly reduce earthquake
losses in woodframe construction. The project is divided into five elements: Testing and
Analysis, Field Investigations, Building Codes and Standards, Economic Aspects, and Education
and Outreach. Task 1.4.8.1 - Nail, Screw and Staple Fastener Connections is one of the twenty-
one interrelated tasks of the Testing and Analysis element.
The objective of Task 1.4.8.1 was to establish a parameter database for sheathing-to-wood
connections tested in lateral bearing under fully reversed cyclic loading. The database is
comprised of a set of ten parameters for each connection type. The objective was accomplished
by testing several sheathing-to-wood connection types. For each connection type, ten specimens
were tested. The parameters were extracted from the load-slip curve of each specimen and
averaged for the ten specimens of each group. The database will be integrated into the 3-
Dimensional Seismic Analysis Software for Woodframe Construction developed in Task 1.5.1 -
Analysis Software.
2 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
Specimens
Figure 1 shows a typical specimen, assembled by attaching a piece of a sheathing panel to a
wood member. Two types of specimens, according to the direction of the applied load, were
tested: parallel and perpendicular. Parallel specimens had the grain of the wood member parallel
to the direction of the applied load, while perpendicular specimens had the grain of the wood
member perpendicular to the direction of the applied load.
Figure 2 shows the overall dimensions of the specimens. Specimens were constructed by
attaching a nominal 2 by 4 in wood member, 6 in long, to a 12 by 4 in piece of a sheathing panel.
For the perpendicular specimens, the length of the wood member was parallel to the smaller
dimension of the sheathing panel. The sheathing panel was attached to the smaller cross-
sectional dimension of the wood member, and the connector was inserted in the center of the
wood member. The length of the wood member for the parallel specimens was turned 90
degrees with respect to that of the perpendicular specimens. The connector, however, was still
inserted in the center of the wood member.
Specimen configurations used in this research were selected to represent limiting bounds for both
the perpendicular and parallel specimens. The lower bound was caused by the sheathing panel
bearing on the fastener against the 3/8 in sheathing panel edge. This situation caused a worst-
case scenario, whereas the upper bound represented a best-case scenario. This was formed when
the fastener boar against the full side of the sheathing panel. These configurations were selected
for testing limiting bounds and do not represent specific locations in a shear wall.
Introduction | 3
Test Matrix
Table 1 summarizes the tests conducted and the variables of each test group. For each test
group, a total of ten specimens were tested. The variables of the testing program are briefly
described below:
The type and thickness of the sheathing panel (see Figure 3). Two types of sheathing
panels were used: oriented strand board (OSB) and plywood. Several OSB panel
thicknesses were tested: 3/8, 7/16, 15/32, and 19/32 in. Only 15/32 in plywood was used.
The type of wood member (see Figure 4). Douglas Fir-Larch (DF-L) was used for all
specimens except for two test groups that were assembled with pressure treated Hem-Fir
(PT HF).
The moisture condition of the wood member at assembling and testing time. Most
coupons were assembled with green or wet wood, which is defined as having a moisture
content greater than 19 percent. Few coupons were assembled with dry wood, which is
defined as having a moisture content less than 12 percent. All specimens were tested with
the wood member in a dry condition.
The type and size of fastener (see Figure 5). Three types of fasteners were used: nails,
wood screws, and staples. Nails used were 8d cooler (2 3/8 in long by 0.113 in diameter),
8d common (2 1/2 in long by 0.131 in diameter), 10d framing (3 in long by 0.131 in
diameter), 10d common (3 in long by 0.148 in diameter) and 10d common short (2 1/8 in
long by 0.148 in diameter). Limited nail penetration tests were also conducted. For those
tests, three nail lengths were used. The shorter 8d cooler nail lengths were 1 11/16 and 2
in; the shorter 8d common nail lengths were 1 13/16 and 2 in. Wood screws used were No.
8 (2 in long by 0.164 in diameter), No. 8 (3 in long by 0.164 in diameter), and No. 10 (3 in
long by 0.190 in diameter). All wood screws used in this research were rolled thread-
hardened. Staples used were 16 gage (1 3/4 in long, 1/2 in crown).
The edge distance (see Figure 6). Edge distance is defined as the distance from the
center of the connector to the nearest edge of the sheathing panel. Most specimens were
assembled with 3/8 in edge distance, which was the control edge distance. To determine
the effects of edge distance, four other distances were used: 2, 1/4, 3/16, and 1/8 in.
The depth to which the head of the nail is driven past the surface of the sheathing panel
(see Figure 7). This depth is commonly known as overdriven depth. In addition to the
flush-driven condition, which was the reference, four overdriven depths were considered:
-1/16, +1/16, +1/8, and +3/16 in. The negative sign means that the head of the nail was
above the surface of the sheathing panel, while the positive sign means that the head of the
nail was below the surface of the sheathing panel.
The direction of loading with respect to the direction of the grain of the wood member.
Two directions were considered: parallel and perpendicular. Parallel specimens were
assembled with the grain of the wood member parallel to the direction of the applied load,
while perpendicular specimens were assembled with the grain of the wood member
perpendicular to the direction of the applied load.
4 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
Materials and Material Properties
Sheathing Panels
Sheathing panels were obtained from three different sources. The APA –The Engineered Wood
Association donated the 3/8, 7/16, 15/32, and 19/32 in OSB as well as the 15/32 in plywood. A
sheet of 19/32 in OSB was purchased locally, and a sheet of 3/8 in OSB was obtained through
direct contact with Louisiana Pacific.
Table 2 summarizes the manufacturer of each sheathing panel; Figure 8 shows the rating stamp
on each of the sheathing panels. Theoretically, there should be no difference in specimen
response due to the manufacturer of the sheathing panel. To quantify any difference in response
that might exist, however, 3/8 and 19/32 in OSB panels were obtained from three different
manufacturers, and 7/16 in OSB panels were obtained from two different manufacturers. The
15/32 in plywood was donated and was not a full panel; because of that, it lacked the
manufacturer stamp.
The density of the OSB panels was determined according to the guidelines for common testing
items of Element 1 – Testing and Analysis. Several standards from the American Society for
Testing and Materials were referenced directly or indirectly including ASTM D1037–96a
(1996a); ASTM D2395–93 (1993); ASTM D4442–92 (1992); and ASTM D4761–96 (1996b).
The samples for determining the density of the OSB panels were obtained from the interior of the
panel. OSB panels are usually denser around the edges due to the pressing. The samples were
obtained from at least 2 in away from the edges of the panel. Three samples 3 in wide by 6 in
long were obtained from each OSB panel.
Several intermediate steps were necessary in order to determine the density of the OSB panels.
The following is an outline of the procedure used:
The moisture content of a sample was determined using Method B – Oven-Drying
(Secondary) as specified in ASTM D4442–92 (1992) and Sections 119 and 120–Moisture
Content and Specific Gravity from ASTM D1037–96a (1996a). Equation 1 was used to
compute the moisture content of the sample.
]/)([100 FFWM (1)
where M is the moisture content (percent), W is the initial weight (g), and F is the final
oven-dry weight (g). The initial weight of the sample was obtained at the beginning of the
test using an electronic scale. The sample was then placed in a drying oven at 103 C until
a constant weight was attained, which took approximately 48 hours. To insure that the
sample had reached constant weight, measurements were taken at least two hours apart of
each other. The final weight was determined using the same electronic scale.
Introduction | 5
The specific gravity of a sample was determined using Equation 2 (1996, 1993).
)(/)( twLFKgrsp (2)
where sp gr is the specific gravity, K is a conversion factor (0.061), and L, w, and t are the
length, width, and thickness, respectively, of the sample (in).
The specific weight or density of the sample was then determined by multiplying the
specific gravity of the sample (sp gr) by the specific weight of water (62.4 lb/ft3).
Table 3 summarizes the density of the OSB panels used in this research. The intermediate
values necessary to determine the density are also presented. A target density between 38 and 40
lb/ft3 was suggested in the guidelines for common testing items of Element 1 – Testing and
Analysis. There is very small variance in OSB panel density between manufacturers. One panel
thickness, 15/32 in, was slightly above; and one panel thickness, 19/32 in, was slightly under the
suggested target density.
Wood Members
Wood members or lumber were standard 2 by 4 in Douglas Fir-Larch No. 2 or better. Two test
groups were assembled with pressure-treated Hem-Fir (PT HF). The lumber used in this
research complied with the guidelines for common testing items for Element 1 – Testing and
Analysis.
One of the variables of the testing program was the lumber moisture condition. A significant
number of wood structures in California are built with green or wet lumber, which statistically
will not be the condition of the lumber during an earthquake. Thus, the specimens were required
to be constructed with green lumber (except for two test groups) and to be tested after the lumber
reached a dry condition. According to the National Design Specifications (NDS) for Wood
Construction (1997a), green or wet lumber has moisture content of at least 19 percent, and dry
lumber has maximum moisture content of 12 percent. The lumber was obtained from Pinnacle
Lumber of Tacoma, Washington. Measurements indicated that the lumber, at the time of
purchase, had moisture content of at least 19 percent. The lumber was stamped green and
Douglas Fir-Larch No. 2 or better.
Several months were required to complete testing. Retaining the lumber moisture during those
months was, therefore, necessary if all specimens were to be assembled with green lumber. To
maintain the moisture content of the lumber as close as possible to that at the time of purchase,
plastic wrapping was used during transportation, and a moisture box was constructed for the
lumber storage. Figure 9 shows the moisture box. The box was composed of a framed bin 4 ft
wide, 3 ft tall, and just over 8 ft long. The box was sealed with plastic in an attempt to maintain
the moisture of the lumber. Also, a storage rack, providing a clearance of approximately 2 in
between the bottom of the box and the bottom of the lumber, was constructed and placed at the
bottom of the moisture box. That space was filled with approximately 1 in of water in an attempt
to keep the humidity constant.
6 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
Because of the large number of specimens, moisture content was measured using a Delmhorst R-
2000 wood moisture meter. Figure 10 shows the moisture meter. The Delmhorst R-2000 is a
resistance type meter with insulated pins that gives quickly and accurately the moisture gradient
(the difference between the shell and core moisture), an estimate of the average moisture content,
and the range of moisture content. The Delmhorst R-2000 measures moisture content over the
range of 6 to 60 percent. A moisture test is conducted by inserting the prongs of the moisture
meter into the center of the lumber to about 1/4 of the member thickness.
The moisture content of the lumber was checked at the time of purchase to confirm that it met
the testing program specifications. Several measurements were made on different lumber
members to ensure proper moisture content. Most of the measurements were between 30 and 40
percent with some as high as 50 percent. All measurements were higher than the threshold for
green lumber. The records of the measurements unfortunately were lost.
The moisture content of the lumber was measured during assembly; those readings are
summarized in Table 4. The following general procedure was used to measure the moisture
content of the lumber: randomly choose a wood member from the lumber pile; cut the wood into
6 in long pieces; randomly select a sample; measure the moisture content in the center of the
sample. The Delmhorst R-2000 wood moisture meter has the capability of reading and storing
up to ten readings. The average reading can then be retrieved. Table 4 gives the average
reading made for each wood member; individual sample readings were not recorded. The results
show that the moisture content of the lumber at assembly is higher than the required minimum.
These results confirm that the lumber was green at purchase time since there should not have
been any change in moisture content from purchase to assembly time because the lumber was
stored in a moisture box.
Prior to assembling and testing the specimens, a simple study was conducted to determine how
long it would take for the wood members to reach a dry condition. The motivation for the study
was to minimize the sporadic checking of moisture content of the large number of specimens.
For this study, ten specimens were used. After assembly, the specimens were left to dry in a
climate-controlled room (see Figure 11) that was maintained between 68 and 70°F; the ambient
air moisture, however, was not recorded. Measurements were made every day for twenty
consecutive days. Figure 12 shows the results of the study, indicating that the wood members
reached a dry condition within approximately 11 days.
Testing of the specimens was conducted approximately 14 days after assembly. This time frame
was used because it best fit the testing schedule. Final moisture content measurements were
made right after testing. Table 5 gives the average moisture content reading for each wood
member right after testing. Measurements were taken at the center of each wood member. The
results show that the moisture content of the wood member at testing time was lower than the
threshold specified for dry lumber for all specimens except for two of them—specimens 35-05
and 90-02 (the first number corresponds to the test group and the second number corresponds to
the specimen number within the group).
A simple study was conducted to validate the measurements made with the moisture meter. The
readings from the moisture meter were compared to the moisture content as determined using
Introduction | 7
Method B – Oven-Drying (Secondary) as specified in ASTM D4442–92 (1992). Table 6
summarizes the results of the study. Three wet wood samples were considered in the study. For
one of those samples, however, the moisture content as determined using Method B was lower
than the threshold for wet wood. Thus, three more samples were added to the original set. For
the six wet wood samples, the average moisture content as determined using Method B was 20.5
percent and as measured by the moisture meter was 27.8 percent. The average reading from the
moisture meter for the wet wood samples was approximately 36 percent higher than the
measurements as determined using Method B. If a reduction of 36 percent is applied to the
readings summarized in Table 4 (see Table 7), any reading below 25.8 percent violates the
moisture content threshold for wet lumber. For wood member Nos. 16, 23, 31, 32, 34, 57 and 59
the moisture content after applying the correction factor is 17.9, 18.7, 16.5, 17.6, 17.8, 18.8, and
18.2 percent, respectively. These measurements are slightly lower than the threshold of 19
percent specified for wet lumber.
Three dry wood samples were also considered. The average moisture content as determined
using Method B was 6.2 percent and as measured by the moisture meter was 8.2 percent. The
average reading from the moisture meter for the dry wood samples was approximately 33 percent
higher than the measurements as determined using Method B. If a reduction of 33 percent is
applied to the readings summarized in Table 5 (see Table 8), the moisture content of all
specimens at testing time is below the maximum 12 percent specified for dry lumber.
The validation of the measurements made using the moisture meter should have been
accomplished prior to assembling and testing the specimens. Because the Delmhorst R-2000
wood moisture meter has a microcontroller circuit that corrects for individual species and is
widely used, the accuracy of the readings was never questioned. Questions about the accuracy of
the measurements were raised, however, after the testing was complete. Those questions
prompted the aforementioned study.
To determine the effects of construction with dry versus wet lumber, 20 specimens were
assembled with dry lumber. These specimens were assembled with the same wet wood except
that the wood was let to dry to below 12 percent moisture content prior to assembly. The process
of drying was accomplished by simply letting the wood dry in a climate controlled room. As
shown in Table 7, those specimens were assembled with wood member No. 48, which had a
corrected moisture content of less than 6 percent.
Before assembly of the specimens, the lumber was cut to 6 in lengths. A few specimens were
then assembled (with green wood) and tested after the wood dried. During those preliminary
tests, it was observed that the testing fixture and consequently the response of the specimens
were very sensitive to imperfections in the lumber. The specimens with significant bowed
lumber (cupping) could not be placed flush within the fixture and would rock during testing.
Cupping is a common side effect of curing small-dimension lumber, which causes the wood to
bend away from the center of the pith. Because specimens were assembled with a small piece of
wet lumber and let to dry, significant cupping was observed in a few specimens. Thus, the
specimens that showed significant cupping were discarded. Overall, very few specimens were
rejected; thus, it is believed that bias was not introduced in the testing program.
8 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
Fasteners
Table 9 summarizes the dimensions and Figure 5 shows the various fasteners used in this testing
program.
Several sizes of nails were used in this testing program. Nails used were 8d cooler (2 3/8 in long
by 0.113 in diameter), 8d common (2 1/2 in long by 0.131 in diameter), 10d framing (3 in long
by 0.131 in diameter), 10d common (3 in long by 0.148 in diameter), and 10d common short (2
1/8 in long by 0.148 in diameter). Limited nail penetration tests were also conducted. For those
tests, three nail lengths were used. These shorter nails were manufactured from full-length nails
by cutting them with shears to the specified lengths. The ends of the nails were pointed with a
grinder. Care was taken to control the nail temperature during the grinding process to minimize
any possible changes in the properties of the nail. The lengths for the shorter 8d cooler nails
were 1 11/16 and 2 in, while the lengths for the shorter 8d common nails were 1 13/16 and 2 in.
Halsteel manufactured all nails used in this research except the 10d common short nails. The 8d
cooler nails and the 10d framing nails were provided by the managers of Element 1 – Testing
and Analysis. The 10d framing nails provided, however, were collated at a 30 angle, which did
not match the angle of the nail gun. Therefore, the 10d framing nails used in this research were
purchased locally. The International Staple, Nail and Tool Association (ISANTA) provided the
8d and the 10d common nails except the 10d common short nails, which were provided by Mr.
Ed Diekmann. All nails were coated with a proprietary thermal plastic resin with adhesive
properties.
The bending yield strength of the nails was determined according to ASTM F1575–95 (1995a).
Figure 13 shows the testing apparatus. The apparatus consists of a base and two blocks. The
base has a steel rod that is gripped by the testing machine. The two blocks are attached to the
base by two screws. The base is fitted with a set of holes such that the blocks can be moved
further apart or close together depending on the length of the nail being tested. The blocks have
cylindrical bearing points that allow the sample to rotate freely. A steel rod with an end
cylindrical point is used to apply the load to the specimen. The diameter of the cylindrical
bearing points and cylindrical loading point is 3/8 in. Testing was conducted on an INSTRON
universal testing machine. Figure 14 shows the apparatus in the INSTRON machine. The load
and displacement were measured using the internal machine load cell and displacement
transducer. The INSTRON machine was controlled by the MTS Teststar II software, which has
data acquisition capabilities. Data were recorded at a rate of 20 points per second.
ASTM F1575–95 (1995a) does not specify the number of samples to be tested. Fifteen
replicates, as suggested by ICBO criterion AC95 – Acceptance Criteria for Test Method to
Determine Bending Yield Moment of Nails (1996c), were used to determine the bending yield
strength of the nails. The samples were selected randomly from the nail box.
Figure 15 shows typical test results used to calculate the bending yield strength of a specimen.
The bending yield strength is calculated from the bending yield moment, My, according to
Equation 3:
Introduction | 9
Z
MF
y
yb (3)
where Fyb is the nominal fastener bending yield strength (psi) and Z is the effective plastic
section modulus (in3) for full plastic hinge (for circular, prismatic nails, Z = d
3/6, where d is the
nail diameter). The bending yield moment, My, is calculated according to Equation 4:
4
bp
y
sPM (4)
where P is the yield load determined from the load-displacement curve and sbp is the spacing
between the cylindrical points of the testing apparatus. The yield load corresponds to the load
for the 5 percent diameter displacement offset from the initial stiffness (see Figure 15). The
initial stiffness was determined by fitting a straight line through the initial linear portion of the
load-displacement curve up to the load corresponding to approximately 50 percent of the
maximum load.
Table 10 summarizes the results of the bending yield tests for the nails. ASTM F1575–95
(1995a) does not specify a minimum bending yield strength. According to the NDS (1997a) and
report No. NER-272 from the National Evaluation Service Committee (1997b), however, the
minimum average bending yield strength is 100 ksi for nails with a diameter less than or equal to
0.135 in (3.429 mm) and 90 ksi for nails with a diameter greater than 0.135 in (3.429 mm). As
shown in Table 10, the nails used in this research meet these minimum requirements.
Three wood screw sizes were used in this testing program. Wood screws used were No. 8 (2 in
long by 0.164 in diameter), No. 8 (3 in long by 0.164 in diameter), and No. 10 (3 in long by
0.190 in diameter). The managers of Element 3 – Building Codes & Standards provided 50 No.
8 (2 in long), 20 No. 8 (3 in long), and 50 No. 10 (3 in long) wood screws. These wood screws
were bought at Home Depot and manufactured by Crown Bolt. Because the number of wood
screws was not enough, additional No. 8 (2 in long) and No. 8 (3 in long) wood screws, also
manufactured by Crown Bolt, were purchased at a local Home Depot. All wood screws used in
this research were flathead rolled thread-hardened coated with zinc.
There is no standard for determining the bending yield strength of wood screws. According to
ICBO criterion AC120 – Acceptance Criteria for Wood Screws (1996d), tests must be in
accordance with ICBO criterion AC95 (1996c), which in turn references ASTM F1575-95
(1995a). The procedure outlined in ASTM F1575-95 (1995a), which is for nails, was therefore
used. The major drawback is that ASTM F1575-95 (1995a) does not specify the location along
the length of the wood screw to apply the load, since location along the length is irrelevant for
nails. As shown in Figure 16 there are two possibilities: mid-length, which includes the threads,
or at the transition zone, which is the location of the transition from smooth shank to threaded
shank. A few tests were conducted by applying the load at the transition zone; however, the
calculated bending yield strength was significantly higher than that specified by the NDS
(1997a). All wood screws were, therefore, tested at mid-length because such an approach would
yield slightly more conservative results. No crushing of the threads was observed during testing.
10 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
Table 11 summarizes the results of the bending yield tests for the wood screws. ASTM F1575–
95 (1995a) does not specify a minimum bending yield strength. According to the NDS (1997a),
design values for wood screws are based on estimated bending yield strength for common wire
nails of same diameter, which corresponds to a minimum average bending yield strength of 100
ksi for 6g screws; 90 ksi for 7g, 8g, and 9g screws; 80 ksi for 10g and 12g screws; 70 ksi for 14g
and 16g screws; 60 ksi for 18g and 20g screws; and 45 ksi for 24g screws. As shown in Table
11, the wood screws used in this research meet these minimum requirements.
Staples used in this testing program were 16 gage. As specified in NER-272 (1997a), staples
should have a 7/16 in minimum outside dimension crown width. Furthermore, for Group II
wood species the minimum penetration for staples is 1 in (NER-272). The staples used in this
research were 1 3/4 in long and had a 1/2 in outside crown, complying with the minimum
requirements. The staples were purchased locally. Paslode manufactured the staples used in this
research. Staples were coated with a proprietary thermal plastic resin with adhesive properties.
Similar to wood screws, there is no standard for determining the bending yield strength of
staples. ASTM F1575–95 (1995a) allows the bending yield strength of smooth shank nails to be
determined from either finished nails or specimens of drawn wire stock from which the nails
would be manufactured. The bending yield strength of the staples could therefore have been
determined from the wire the staples were manufactured. Because the staples were purchased
locally, wire samples were not available. The bending yield strength of the staples was therefore
not determined.
Introduction | 11
Specimen Assembly
The specimens were assembled using the wooden apparatus shown in Figure 17. The simple
wooden apparatus was constructed to secure the longer cross-section dimension of the wood
member in an upright position while aligning the fastener at the specified edge distance for the
sheathing panel. The fastener was driven in the center of the smaller cross section dimension of
the wood member. Such a procedure allowed for uniformity in constructing the specimens.
A Porter Cable model FR 350 pneumatic framing nailer was used to drive the nails. The nail gun
was set using an adjustable nosepiece to slightly underdrive the nails. The slightly underdriven
nails were set to their proper depth using a hammer for the flush-driven nails. Once a specimen
was assembled, the nail was examined to make sure it was flush with the surface of the sheathing
panel.
The specimens with overdriven or underdriven nails were set to their proper depth using a
hammer and special punches. The punches are shown in Figure 18. The body of a punch is 3/4
in round mild steel. The drive pin is pressed fit into the punch body and protrudes from the end
of the punch the exact length of the final desired overdriven depth. The punches for the
underdriven nails were also constructed of mild steel; however, a hole was milled into the end of
the punch to the desired underdriven depth. The ends of the punches were heat-treated. Using
the same nail gun setting as before, the nails were slightly underdriven. They were then set to
their proper depth using a hammer and the corresponding punch. The specimens with staples were constructed using the same wooden apparatus. The staples
were inserted with the crown parallel to the long dimension of the wood member. ASTM
D1761–88 (1988) specifies that the staple shall be inserted with its crown at a 45 (10) angle
to the grain direction of the wood member. Two geometric restrictions, however, existed that
prevented the staples from being inserted as per ASTM D1761–88 (1988): the width of the wood
member and the edge distance specified for the sheathing panel. The staples were therefore
inserted according to NER-272 (1997b), which specifies that staples attaching diaphragms and
non-diaphragm structural-use panels shall be installed with their crowns parallel to the long
dimension of the wood member, and shall be driven flush with the surface of the sheathing panel.
A Paslode 3200/50 S16 pneumatic stapler was used to drive the staples. The specimens with
staples were assembled using the same procedure as that used to assemble specimens with nails
except that a different set of punches were used. The punches for the staples are shown in
Figure 19.
Measurements taken prior to and following the construction of several specimens indicate that
there was neither shortening of the pins nor increase in the depth of the holes. Nails and staples
overdriven and underdriven by the described method were usually within 1/64 in of the desired
depth. The specimens with wood screws were also assembled using the wooden apparatus. The main
difference is that a lead hole was drilled prior to construction of the specimens. The NDS
(1997a) specifies that for wood with specific gravity less than 0.6, the part of the lead hole
12 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
receiving the shank shall be approximately 7/8 the diameter of the shank and that part receiving
the threaded portion shall be 7/8 the diameter of the wood screw at the root of the thread (1997a).
For the No. 8 wood screws, a lead hole of 1/8 in (3.175 mm) diameter was drilled; for the No. 10
wood screws the diameter of the lead hole was 5/32 in (3.969 mm). The same size hole was
drilled through the sheathing panel and into the wood member for the entire length of the wood
screw. Wood screws were driven using a Makita 14 volt cordless drill. The wood screws were
examined to ensure that they were flush with the sheathing panels. Neither overdriven nor
underdriven specimens with wood screws were tested.
Introduction | 13
Testing Setup
Testing for this research initative was conducted on an INSTRON universal testing machine.
The testing machine was controlled by the MTS Teststar II software, which has data acquisition
features. Connector slip was measured by two cable extension linear position transducers
mounted at the base of the testing apparatus. To measure the applied load, a load cell was
installed between the testing machine and the testing apparatus. The testing apparatus used was
specially designed and constructed to handle a large quantities of specimens quickly and easily
without comperming accuracy.
Testing Apparatus
ASTM D1761–88 (1988) details the testing of a single fastener connection. This standard,
however, is used to test the fastener in simple, monotonic shear. There have been several
concerns raised about the prescribed setup. Several testing devices have been proposed to
remedy the various shortcomings, but the proposed devices require significant setup time and
have made the specimen setup very difficult.
A new testing apparatus was designed and constructed for this research (2000). The apparatus is
shown in Figure 20. With the prospect of testing close to one thousand specimens, a simple and
rapidly changeable apparatus was required. The new testing apparatus incorporates the main
properties of the standard testing apparatus and some properties of alternative testing devices.
The principal design modifications were aimed at making the fixture easy to use and more
efficient without sacrificing accuracy.
The main improvement of the apparatus is a new clamping system. A clamping system was
designed and engineered so that the apparatus would firmly secure the specimen and yet would
allow rapid change of specimens. Two clamps secure the specimen in place by clamping down
the wood member as shown in Figure 21(a). Two other clamps are used to secure the sliding
backside of the apparatus. The reason for this sliding backside is that the apparatus can then be
used to test different sheathing panel thickness. Figure 21(b) shows the sliding backside away
from the specimen; Figure 21(c) shows the sliding backside at the final position. Another
clamp, shown in Figure 21(d), is used to firmly grab the sheathing panel.
Although the clamping system allows for rapid change of specimens, there was a potential for
specimen rocking. To minimize the potential for rocking, the plate used to clamp down the
wood member has four corner tabs. These tabs allow specimens with reasonable cupped wood
members to be tested. Extreme amounts of cupping also interfere with the movement of the
sheathing panel. The sheathing panel must move parallel to the face of the wood member. The
cupping shape of the wood member makes it impossible to mount the specimen in the testing
apparatus while maintaining a planar relationship between the sheathing panel and the wood
member. As previously mentioned, specimens with large amounts of cupping were discarded
because they could not be tested. Very few specimens were rejected; thus, it is believed that bias
was not introduced in the testing program.
14 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
A more important reason for the four corner tabs is to eliminate a compressive stress state on the
wood member. If a flat plate were used, the clamping force necessary to secure the specimen
firmly in the testing apparatus would also cause compression parallel to grain in the wood
member. This compression could, among other things, restrain the withdrawal of the fastener,
especially during monotonic loading, increase the lateral resistance of the fastener, increase the
stiffness of the connection, and increase the occurrence of fatigue failure.
There was also a potential for slip between the clamp and the sheathing panel. Several testing
apparatuses use bolts to secure the sheathing panel, thus eliminating the slip between the
apparatus and the sheathing panel. These apparatuses, however, are cumbersome, requiring
significant amounts of time during setup. The apparatus used in this research relied on friction
between the clamp and the sheathing panel because the force applied to the sheathing panel
through the clamp was perpendicular to the force applied during testing. To minimize the slip
potential, the clamp was chosen so that a large contact area between the face of the clamp and
the sheathing panel would exist. That measure was sufficient to prevent slip between the clamp
and the sheathing panel.
In addition to the new clamping system, the testing apparatus has the frictionless rolling system
shown in Figure 22. As a specimen is loaded, the sheathing panel must move parallel to the face
of the wood member (in plane) without moving out of plane. The sliding backside of the
apparatus shown in Figures 21(b) and 21(c) prevents any out-of-plane movement, while the
frictionless rolling system allows the sheathing panel to freely move in plane.
Load Cell
For accuracy purposes, the testing apparatus has its own load cell, as shown in Figure 23. The
load cell manufactured by Sensotec, model number 41/0571-07, has a range of plus or minus five
hundred pounds and is accurate to the nearest hundredth of a pound.
Position Transducers
Figure 24 shows the instruments used to measure the fastener slip. Displacements were
measured by linear position transducers mounted at the base of the testing fixture. The
transducers were mounted leveled as closely as possible to the fastener to improve the accuracy
of the measurements. The displacements measured correspond to the slip in the fastener. Two
LX-PA cable extension transducers (string pots) were used. UniMeasure, Inc. manufactured the
transducers, which have a range of 3.8 in, have essentially infinite resolution, and are linear to ±
1 percent of the full range.
Introduction | 15
Testing Machine
Testing was conducted in an INSTRON universal testing machine model 1321. The testing
apparatus including the load cell and string pots were attached to the testing machine as shown in
Figure 25. The INSTRON machine is capable of cycling at 50 Hz and has an axial load capacity
of 20,000 lb. For this research initiative, the load range was set to of 5,000 lb.
The INSTRON machine is outfitted with an internal load cell and a Linear Variable
Displacement Transformer (LVDT) transducer.
Data Acquisition
The MTS Teststar II software, which has data acquisition capabilities, controlled the INSTRON
machine. Data were recorded at a rate of 20 points per second. The following data were
recorded:
Applied displacement. This is the displacement as specified by the loading protocol.
String pots displacement. This is the displacement measured at the fastener location,
which corresponds to the fastener slip. Theoretically, this displacement should be exactly
equal to the applied displacement. Due to elongation of the sheathing panel, slip at the
grips, and relaxation of the specimen, however, there may exist a small difference between
the fastener slip and the applied displacement.
Load from the internal machine load cell. This is the load corresponding to the applied
displacement as measured by the internal load cell.
Load from the loading apparatus load cell. The load cell attached to the loading
apparatus has less signal noise than the internal load cell. Theoretically, load readings
from both load cells should be equal; due to signal noise, however, there may exist a small
difference between the measurements.
The redundancy in the data acquisition procedure was chosen for safeguard reasons.
16 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
Loading Protocol
Testing was accomplished using the simplified basic loading history developed in Task 1.3.2 -
Testing Protocol. One of the main reasons for this selection was that this protocol is particularly
useful for the development of analytical models. The loading history is defined by variations in
deformation amplitudes, using the reference deformation as the absolute measure of
deformation amplitude.
The simplified basic loading history is shown in Figure 26. The protocol consists of initiation
cycles and primary cycles. All cycles have identical positive and negative amplitudes. Initiation
cycles are executed at the beginning of the loading history; they serve to check the loading
equipment, measuring devices, and the response at small amplitudes. There are six initiation
cycles with amplitude of 0.05. Seven primary cycles follow with amplitude of 0.075. The
amplitude of the primary cycle is then increased to 0.1, and seven cycles are completed. The
procedure is repeated for amplitudes of primary cycles equal to 0.2 and 0.3, and four cycles
are completed for each one of these amplitudes. Then the procedure is repeated for amplitudes
of primary cycles equal to 0.4, 0.7 and 1.0, each having only three total cycles. After 1.0,
the amplitude is increased by 0.5, each having also three total cycles, i.e., three cycles of 1.5,
three cycles of 2.0. The loading protocol stops after the three cycles of amplitude equal to 3.5
are completed. Deformation control was used throughout the testing.
Determination of the Reference Deformation
The loading history is defined by variations in deformation amplitudes, using the reference
deformation as the absolute measure of deformation amplitude. The reference deformation
is defined as the maximum deformation the test specimen is expected to sustain according to a
prescribed acceptance criterion and assuming that the proposed loading history has been applied
to the test specimen. Therefore, it was necessary to estimate the deformation capacity of the
specimens prior to cyclic testing.
The general guidelines to determine the deformation are as follows:
Conduct a monotonic test, which provides data on the monotonic deformation capacity,
m. This capacity is defined as the deformation at which the applied load drops, for the
first time, below 80 percent of the maximum load that was applied to the specimen.
Figure 27 shows the load-deformation response of a typical monotonic test, including the
maximum load and monotonic deformation capacity.
Use a specific fraction of m as the reference deformation for the cyclic load test. A
value of = 0.6m has been suggested. The reference deformation is also highlighted in
Figure 27.
Table 12 summarizes the values of the reference deformation used for the loading protocol.
Several sizes and types of fasteners and sheathing panels will be tested in this research initiative.
Because the deformation capacity will be determined empirically, a different value for was
Introduction | 17
expected for each different specimen configuration. Mainly for simplicity, a reference
deformation was selected for each loading protocol, depending on the type of fastener used,
i.e., only one value for all specimens assembled with nails. Furthermore, a lower bound value
was selected because of normal variation in material and the desire to test specimens with
weaker configuration than the baseline configuration. For those specimens, a lower bound value
for the reference deformation could yield a full-spectrum load-slip curve, in other words a curve
with post-peak response. A full-spectrum curve was necessary to extract the parameters
necessary for modeling.
Reference Deformation for Nails
Several perpendicular-to-grain specimens were tested using a monotonic loading protocol. The
results of those tests are summarized in Table 13. Two sets of specimens were tested: the first
set had eleven specimens assembled to represent a possible general worst-case scenario. This
was accomplished by offsetting the nail 7/16 in from the center of the smaller cross-sectional
dimension of the wood member, as shown in Figure 28. The offset distance was determined by
offsetting the edge of the sheathing panel 1/16 in from the center of the wood member and at the
same time maintaining the minimum 3/8 in edge distance for the nail. The 1/16 in distance was
determined by assuming a 1/8 in gap between sheathing panels. The other set only had four
specimens and was assembled with the nail driven in the center of the smaller cross-sectional
dimension of the wood member as shown in Figure 29.
The value for as determined from the first set of results was 0.17 in, while the value for as
determined from the second set of results was 0.22 in. The results from several specimens within
the first set were disregarded. The last column in Table 13 briefly describes the reason those
results were not included in the determination of the reference deformation .
Preliminary cyclic tests were also conducted to help establish a reasonable value for the
reference deformation . Six specimens were assembled with the nail offset as described above
and tested using the simplified basic loading protocol with the reference deformation equal to
0.17 in. The load-slip curves of all six specimens are shown in Figure 31. Consideration was
given only to the positive load-and-slip portion of the curves, because this portion of the curve
contains the limiting information needed for modeling purposes. The behavior of specimens No.
2 and 3 was significantly different from the others due to the mode of failure. The wood member
of specimens No. 2 and 3 split, while the other four specimens failed because the nail tore
through the sheathing panel edge. Also, specimen No. 4 failed prematurely, as is evident by the
lack of post-peak response. The load-slip curves of the other three specimens exhibit the desired
behavior for modeling purposes. The curves have full envelopes with considerable post-peak
response.
In addition, three specimens were assembled with the fastener driven in the center of the wood
member. These specimens were also tested using the simplified basic loading protocol. The
reference deformation , however, was equal to 0.20 in. According to the monotonic test results,
the reference deformation should have been 0.22 in. The value 0.20 in was selected for testing
simply because the previous set of tests conducted with equal to 0.17 in resulted in good
18 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
overall response, and an increase from 0.17 to 0.20 in was thought to be more reasonable. The
load-slip curves of all three specimens are shown in Figure 32. Consideration was given only to
the positive load-and-slip portion of the curves, because this portion of the curve contains the
limiting information needed for modeling purposes. All three specimens failed because the nail
tore through the sheathing panel edge. Specimen No. 1 failed somewhat prematurely, as is
evident by the lack of post-peak response. The load-slip curves of the other two specimens
exhibit the desired behavior for modeling purposes. The curves have full envelopes with
considerable post peak response.
The reference deformation was selected to be 0.17 in for specimens assembled with nails and
having the load applied perpendicular to the grain of the wood member. The reasons for the
selection are the following:
The load-slip curves did not show significant sensitivity to the different reference
deformation values used. Both values yielded curves with full envelopes and reasonable
post-peak response.
A lower bound was desirable in order to obtain reasonable curves for the different
specimen configurations. Testing will be conducted on many specimens with weaker
configurations than those tested during this preliminary study, which are representative of
the baseline configuration. For the weaker specimens, a higher value for the reference
deformation could cause the specimens to fail prematurely, lacking therefore any post-peak
response. Such an occurrence would make it very difficult, if not impossible, to determine
the parameters necessary for modeling those specimens.
Several parallel-to-grain specimens were also tested using a monotonic loading protocol. The
results are summarized in Table 14. A set of seven specimens assembled with the nail driven in
the center of the smaller cross-sectional dimension of the wood member was tested. Unlike the
perpendicular-to-grain specimens, no specimen with an offset nail was tested. Because the load
was applied parallel-to-grain, there would not have been any difference in response between a
specimen with offset nail and one with the nail driven in the center of the wood member (see
Figure 30).
The value for as determined from these parallel-to-grain tests was 0.23 in. This value is
similar to the value obtained from the perpendicular-to-grain tests conducted on specimens with
nails driven in the center of the wood member.
Cyclic tests were also conducted for the parallel-to-grain condition. All specimens were
assembled with the nail in the center of the wood member and tested using the simplified basic
loading protocol. A group of six specimens were tested with the reference deformation equal
to 0.17 in, and a group of four specimens were tested with the reference deformation equal to
0.20 in. Simplicity was the main reason for using the same values for the reference deformation
as used to test perpendicular-to-grain specimens. The load-slip curves of the six first
specimens are shown in Figure 33 and for the last four specimens in Figure 34. Consideration
was given only to the positive load-and-slip portion of the curves, because this portion of the
curve contains the limiting information needed for modeling purposes. All specimens, with
exception of specimen No 4 of the first group, failed because the nail tore through the sheathing
Introduction | 19
panel edge. Nail withdrawal was observed for specimen No. 4 of the first group. The load-slip
curves of all specimens exhibit the desired behavior for modeling purposes. The curves have full
envelopes with considerable post-peak response.
The reference deformation was selected also to be 0.17 in for specimens assembled with nails
and having the load applied parallel to the grain of the wood member. The reasons are (a) that
some of the parallel-to-grain specimens were expected to be weaker than those tested in this
preliminary study, and (b) simplicity.
Reference Deformation for Wood Screws
The procedure to establish a reference deformation for the specimens assembled with nails was
followed for specimens assembled with wood screws. The main difference is that only
specimens perpendicular-to-grain and with wood screws inserted in the center of the wood
member were tested (see Figure 29).
Four specimens were tested using a monotonic loading protocol; the results are summarized in
Table 15. The value for as determined from these tests was 0.12 in.
Cyclic tests were also conducted. The specimens were assembled with the wood screw in the
center of the wood member and tested using the simplified basic loading protocol. A group of
three specimens were tested with that reference deformation value. Two other specimens were
tested with the reference deformation equal to 0.17 in. The load-slip curves of the three first
specimens are shown in Figure 35 and for the other two specimens in Figure 36. Consideration
was given only to the positive load-and-slip portion of the curves, because this portion of the
curve contains the limiting information needed for modeling purposes. All specimens
experienced fatigue failure of the wood screw. The sudden drop in load after the peak load is
evidence of this behavior. Although there is a sudden decrease in load after the peak load, the
load-slip curves of all specimens still exhibited some post-peak response and therefore the
desired behavior for modeling purposes.
Thus, the reference deformation was selected to be 0.12 in for specimens assembled with wood
screws. This reference deformation will be used regardless of the loading direction.
20 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
Reference Deformation for Staples
The procedure previously used to establish a reference deformation for the specimens assembled
with nails and wood screws was also followed for specimens assembled with staples. Only
specimens with staples inserted in the center of the wood member were considered (see Figure
29).
Staples are thought to be similar to nails. In fact, loads for staples can be reasonably taken to be
equal to twice the value for a nail with a shank diameter equal to that of one leg of the staple,
provided that the crown width is adequate and that the penetration of both legs of the staple into
the wood member is approximately two-thirds of the length (1994, 1995b). Thus, very few
staple specimens were considered in this preliminary study.
Two specimens were tested using a monotonic loading protocol; the results are summarized in
Table 16. These specimens were loaded perpendicular-to-grain. The value for as determined
from these tests was 0.30 in, a value significantly larger than the one obtained from tests
conducted on specimens with nails. The staple did not tear through the edge of the sheathing
panel, as was the case with the specimens assembled with nails. Furthermore, as slip increased
the peak load remained essentially constant as the staple slowly withdrew from the wood
member. Slip was notably large before the load dropped, for the first time, below 80 percent of
the peak load. Consequently, the reference deformation was therefore significantly large and
even unrealistic.
Cyclic tests were conducted using a more realistic value for the reference deformation . Two
values were studied: 0.17 in and 0.20 in. The specimens were assembled with the staple in the
center of the wood member and tested using the simplified basic loading protocol. Two
specimens were tested with the load applied perpendicular-to-grain: one with a reference
deformation equal to 0.17 in and another with a reference deformation equal to 0.20 in. A third
specimen was tested with the load applied parallel-to-grain and with a reference deformation
equal to 0.17 in. The load-slip curves for those specimens are shown in Figures 37, 38, and 39,
respectively. Consideration was given only to the positive load and positive slip portion of the
curves, because this portion of the curve contains the limiting information needed for modeling
purposes. All three specimens experienced fatigue failure of the staple. The sudden drop in load
after the peak load is evidence of this behavior. It is expected that most of the specimens
assembled with staples will fail in a similar matter. Although there is a sudden decrease in load
because of the failure mode of the staple specimens, some post-peak response is still evident, and
the parameters necessary for modeling can be extracted.
The reference deformation was therefore selected to be 0.20 in for specimens assembled with
staples. This value was deemed to be appropriate and will be used regardless of the loading
direction.
Introduction | 21
Loading Rate
The frequency selected for testing all coupons was 0.5 Hz. The testing protocol does not have
any specific recommendation on loading rate; however, reference is made to ISO, which
recommends a displacement rate between 0.1 and 10 mm/sec. The loading frequency used was
converted to loading rate using a simple conversion factor. Figures 40(a), 40(b), and 40(c)
show the loading rate for the entire loading history for the three reference deformations used in
this testing program, respectively: 0.12 in for the wood screws, 0.17 in for the nails, and 0.20 in
for the staples. Because the loading frequency was constant throughout the entire loading
history, the loading rate varied throughout the loading history.
22 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
Preliminary Studies
Several preliminary investigations were conducted prior to testing the complete set of specimens.
These investigations involved the following variables:
The recommended loading histories that may represent the seismic demands imposed
on the connection due to ordinary ground motion.
The friction between the specimen and the testing fixture.
Loading History
This study involved testing several specimens using the basic and the simplified basic loading
histories. The simplified basic loading history is a potentially simplified alternative to the basic
loading history. Both loading histories are defined by variations in deformation amplitudes,
using the reference deformation as the absolute measure of deformation amplitude.
The basic loading protocol consists of initiation cycles, primary cycles, and trailing cycles. All
cycles have identical positive and negative amplitudes. Initiation cycles are executed at the
beginning of the loading history. A primary cycle is a cycle that is larger than all of the
preceding cycles and is followed by smaller cycles, which are called trailing cycles. All trailing
cycles have amplitudes equal to 75 percent of the amplitude of the preceding primary cycle.
The simplified basic loading history is similar to the basic loading history except that the trailing
cycles of the basic loading history are replaced by cycles of amplitude equal to that of the
preceding primary cycle. Thus, in the simplified basic loading history, cycles of equal amplitude
are being executed at each step.
Seven specimens were tested using the basic loading history; six specimens were tested using the
simplified basic loading history. Both loading histories used a reference deformation equal to
0.17 in. All specimens were assembled perpendicular-to-grain with the nail driven in the center
of the smaller cross-section dimension of the wood member (see Figure 29). The load-slip
curves for the specimens tested using the basic loading protocol are shown in Figure 41; the
load-slip curves for the specimens tested using the simplified basic loading protocol are shown in
Figure 42. Consideration was given only to the positive load and positive slip portion of the
curves, because this portion of the curve contains the limiting information needed for modeling
purposes. All specimens failed because the nail tore through the sheathing panel edge.
Both loading histories were developed with an emphasis on performance evaluation. Emphasis
was placed on a conservative but realist simulation of cycles that contribute significantly to
damage at the 10/50 hazard level, as well as on adequate simulation of potentially damaging
cycles at hazards levels associated with higher performance levels. Both considerations make
the basic loading history more complicated because they require the distinction between primary
and trailing cycles as well as the execution of a large number of relatively small cycles. In
contrast, the simplified basic loading history makes no distinction between primary and trailing
cycles. This simplification facilitates the execution of the test as well as the interpretation of the
Introduction | 23
results; however, it may overestimate the extent of damage, particularly for large amplitude
cycles.
A qualitative comparison between the load-slip curves of the specimens tested illustrates the
intent of the loading history. The specimens tested using the basic loading history have on
average a slightly greater load-slip curve envelope and are able to sustain slightly more
deformation. In contrast, the specimens tested using the simplified basic loading history have on
average load-slip curves that exhibit slightly earlier failure and slightly less capacity.
Nevertheless, there is no significant difference between the responses of the specimens tested
using the two loading protocols.
Similar results were found from a quantitative comparison between the load-slip curves of the
specimens tested. The results, shown in Tables 17 and 18, are compared on an average basis.
The initial stiffness and maximum load for the simplified basic loading history connection type
were 9 and 17 percent lower, respectively, than that of the basic loading history connection type.
The slip at maximum load had also decreased by 18 percent from the basic loading history
connection type to the simplified basic loading history connection type. In addition, the
simplified basic loading history connection type absorbed 6 percent less total energy than the
basic loading history connection type. These results confirm the qualitative comparison that was
preformed and also show that there is no significant difference between the two loading
protocols.
The simplified basic loading protocol is particularly useful for the development of analytical
models. The extraction of the database parameters from load-slip curves obtained from
simplified basic loading history tests will be significantly simpler without compromising the
results. Thus, the simplified basic loading protocol was selected for this research initiative.
Friction
This study was conducted to determine the magnitude of the friction within the testing setup. As
shown in Figure 43, two main sources of friction exist within the testing system: the sheathing
panel rubbing against the rollers of the testing apparatus, and the rollers rubbing against the rest
of the testing apparatus. The following precedure was used to quantify the overall friction within
the setup:
A test was conducted without any specimen but with the testing apparatus mounted on
the INSTRON testing machine (Condition No. 1). Figure 44(a) shows the test setup for
this condition. The data recorded represents the signal noise of the testing machine.
A test was conducted with a piece of sheathing panel clamped on the top part of the
testing apparatus and pressed as tightly as possible against the rollers of the testing
apparatus (Condition No. 2). Figure 44(b) shows the test setup for this condition. This
condition represents a worst-case scenario because in an actual test setup, the sliding
backside of the testing apparatus will not be pressed against the sheathing panel.
Although the sliding of the backside of the apparatus is a manual procedure, the operator
must be careful not to cram the backside against the sheathing panel. Furthermore, the
24 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
sliding backside is fitted with a frictionless rolling system that should allow the sheathing
panel to move freely. The results of this test give the friction between the sheathing
panel and the testing apparatus, combined with the friction between the frictionless
rollers and the rest of the testing apparatus.
The final test was conducted with a full specimen (Condition No. 3). Figure 44(c) shows
the test setup for this condition, which represents actual testing conditions.
To obtain the correct force applied to a specimen, the force measured during the sheathing panel
test must be subtracted from the force measured during the final test.
Several tests were conducted using Conditions No. 1 through No. 3. The measured load-slip
curves for Conditions No. 1 are shown in Figure 45(a). These results indicate that the signal
noise in the load cell is approximately 1.0 lb. This value corresponds to approximately 1 percent
of the load cell range. The measured load-slip curves for Condition No. 2 are shown in Figure
45(b). These results show that the combined friction between the sheathing panel and the rollers
and between the rollers and the rest of the testing apparatus is less than 1.5 lb. In fact, it is
difficult to distinguish between the friction within the testing setup and the signal noise of the
load cell. Figure 42 shows the measured load-slip curve for condition No. 3. As shown in these
curves, measured load values for actual tests are in the neighborhood of 200 lb. The signal noise,
as well as the load value corresponding to the friction within the system, accounts for about 1
percent of the measured load in an actual set up. Thus the friction within the system can be
neglected, for all practical purposes.
Introduction | 25
Simple Analysis
The objective of this research initiative doesn’t include analysis of the data. A comprehensive
analysis of the data is being conducted as a separate research program. A study of the response
of connection types No. 03 and No. 47 (see Table 1) is included in this report as an example of
the analysis being conducted.
Figure 46 and Figure 47 show the load-slip curves for all specimens of connection types No. 03
and No. 47, respectively. Connection type No. 03 was assembled with 3/8 in OSB, Douglas-Fir
Larch green wood member, flush-driven 8d cooler nails, and 3/8 in edge distance. Connection
type No. 47 was assembled with the same materials, except that 8d common nails were used.
Both sets were tested after the wood member reached a dry condition. Loading was applied
perpendicular to the grain of the wood member.
Tables 19 and 20 summarize the material properties and the results for each specimen within
both sets. Results are given in terms of initial stiffness, maximum load, and slip at maximum
load.
Results are compared on an average basis. The initial stiffness and maximum load for
connection type No. 47 are approximately 23 and 6 percent greater, respectively, than those for
connection type No. 03. The slip at maximum load, however, is 17 percent greater for
connection type No. 03 than that of connection type No. 47. Thus, on average, connection type
No. 47 is stiffer, has greater strength capacity, but has slightly less slip capacity. These results
are very typical in the sense that an increase in initial stiffness and strength capacity are usually
followed by a decrease in slip capacity.
Figure 48 shows the average values for initial stiffness, maximum load, and slip at maximum
load for both connection types. Also plotted are the standard deviations, which are significantly
high. In fact, there is an overlap of almost plus or minus one standard deviation for the averages.
For example, the average initial stiffness minus one standard deviation for connection type No.
47 is approximately the same value as the average initial stiffness for connection type No. 03.
Similarly, the average initial stiffness plus one standard deviation for connection type No. 03 is
approximately the same value as the average initial stiffness for connection type No. 47.
These results, therefore, show that connector type No. 47 is stiffer and has greater strength
capacity but has less slip capacity than connector type No. 03.
26 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
Data Reduction and Viewer
The objective of this testing program was to establish a parameter database for sheathing-to-
wood connections tested in lateral bearing under fully reversed cyclic loading. The parameters
are necessary for modeling purposes. The parameter database will eventually be integrated into
the 3-Dimensional Seismic Analysis Software for Woodframe Construction developed in Task
1.5.1 - Analysis Software.
As discussed in this report, several sheathing-to-wood connections were tested. The test results
were summarized as load-slip curves. For each connection type, a group of ten specimens was
tested. The database comprised a set of ten parameters for each connection type. Two of the
parameters were maintained constant; the rest were extracted from the load-slip curve of each
specimen and averaged for the ten specimens of each group. The parameters are defined below
and shown graphically in Figure 49.
1. Ko – Initial stiffness
2. δu – Slip corresponding to maximum load Fu
3. r1 – Secondary stiffness divided by Ko
4. F1 – The load corresponding to the y intercept of the line with slope r1Ko
5. r2 – Degradation stiffness divided by Ko
6. r3 – Unloading stiffness divided by Ko
7. r4 – Pinching stiffness divided by Ko
8. FI – The load corresponding to the y intercept of the line with slope r4Ko
9. α – Stiffness degradation factor
10. β – Strength degradation factor.
The first five parameters, Ko, δu, r1, F1, and r2, establish the envelope response of a connector
subjected to monotonic loading. The representation of the envelope response by these
parameters captures crushing of the wood member and sheathing panel and the yielding of the
connector. The other five parameters, r3, r4, FI, α, and β, define the hysteretic part of the
connector response to general cyclic loading.
The parameters were extracted from the positive quadrant (where positive load and positive slip
are plotted) of the load-slip curve. As a specimen is cyclically loaded, depending on the
direction of the loading, the connector will either tear through the edge of the sheathing panel or
bear against the sheathing panel, which would cause the connector to withdraw from the wood
member. There is, therefore, a noticeable difference between the positive quadrant and the
negative quadrant (where negative load and negative slip are plotted) of a load-slip curve.
Plotted in the positive quadrant is the ―tearing data‖, while plotted in the negative quadrant is the
―bearing data‖. Because the ―tearing data‖ usually cause the failure of the specimen; those data
appear to represent more realistically what a sheathing-to-wood connection will actually
experience.
A simple program was written to extract the parameters from the load-slip curves. A significant
number of curves were generated from the testing program. Thus it became necessary to
Introduction | 27
automate the extraction procedure. The program simply reads a data file and extracts the
parameters. The extraction procedure is outlined below:
Two cable extension transducers were used to measure the slip of the connector. The
average of the two measurements is calculated, and the initial slip is subtracted from the
measured slip.
The data are separated into primary and secondary loops. Primary loops are those
generated from the first loading to a given applied displacement level. Secondary loops
are generated from all the subsequent cycles to that same applied displacement level.
The maximum load, Fu, and its corresponding slip, δu, are extracted.
The initial stiffness, Ko, is determined by using the ascending branch of the first
primary loop of the data. Figure 50 shows the part of a typical load-slip curve used to
determine the initial stiffness. The data used in determining the initial stiffness are
bracketed between two percentage values of the maximum load. For example, if the
maximum load is 200 lb, the lower bound is 10 percent, and the upper bound is 40 percent,
the data between 20 and 80 lb would then be used to determine the initial stiffness for the
curve. A lower bound was necessary to avoid data in the range of the signal noise while
the upper bound was necessary to avoid the nonlinear part of the curve. Once the data
were bracketed, the initial stiffness was determined using a least squares fit to the data.
The parameter r1 and the load corresponding to the y intercept of the line with slope
r1Ko, F1 are also determined by using the ascending branch of the primary loop of the data.
Figure 51 shows the part of a typical load-slip curve used to determine both parameters.
The data to be used in determining a ―secondary‖ stiffness are bracketed between the
maximum load and a percentage value of that load. For example, if the maximum load is
200 lb and the lower bound is 60 percent, the data between 120 and 200 lb would be used
to determine the ―secondary‖ stiffness for the load-slip curve. Once the data were
bracketed, a least squares fit was used to fit a line through the data. The parameter r1 is
then determined by dividing the slope of the line by Ko. The parameter F1 corresponds to
the y intercept of that line.
The parameter r2 is determined using a similar procedure to that used to determine the
parameter r1, except that the data used are the descending branch of the envelope curve
(after the maximum load has been reached). The primary loops of the data are also used to
determine r2. Figure 52 shows the part of a typical load-slip curve used to determine
parameter r2. The data to be used in determining the descending stiffness of the envelope
curve are bracketed between the maximum load and a percentage value of that load.
Descending stiffness was the stiffness of the envelope curve past the maximum load. For
example, if the maximum load is 200 lb and the lower bound is 60 percent, the data
between 200 and 120 lb would be used to determine the descending stiffness for the load-
slip curve. Once the data were bracketed, a least squares fit was used to fit a line through
the data. The parameter r2 is then determined by dividing the slope of the line by Ko.
The parameter r3 is determined using a similar procedure to that used to determine
parameters r1 and r2. The primary and secondary loops are used to determine r3. Figure
53 shows the part of a typical load-slip curve used to determine parameter r3. The data to
be used in determining the unloading stiffness are bracketed along the load axis and along
28 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
the slip axis. Along the load axis the data are bracketed between the maximum load and a
percentage value of that load. Along the slip axis the data are bracketed between a certain
number of cycles prior to reaching the maximum load and a certain number of cycles after
the maximum load is reached. For example, if the maximum load is 200 lb and the lower
bound is 50 percent, the data would be bracketed along the load axis between 100 and 200
lb. By considering four cycles before and one cycle after the maximum load is reached,
the data would be bracketed along the slip axis between those cycles. For each cycle
bracketed, a least-squares fit was used to fit a line through the data. The total number of
lines will depend on the number of cycles considered. An average line was then
determined. The parameter r3 was then determined by dividing the slope of the average
line by Ko.
The parameter r4 and the load corresponding to the y intercept of the line with slope
r4Ko, FI are determined by using the pinched part of the load-slip curve. Figure 54 shows
the part of a typical load-slip curve used to determine both parameters. Significant
pinching is generally noticeable on a few cycles prior to the reaching of the maximum load
and continues a few cycles prior to failure of the specimen. The data to determine the
pinching stiffness are bracketed along both axes. Along the load axis the data are
bracketed by choosing the number of cycles prior to the reaching of the maximum load.
Along the slip axis, the data are bracketed by selecting a percentage value of the slip
corresponding to the maximum load. The percentage value corresponds to an upper bound
to limit the selection to the linear part of the pinching. The percentage value is used in
both slip directions. For example, if the slip corresponding to the maximum load is 0.2 in
and the upper bound is 20 percent, the data would be bracketed along the slip axis between
–0.04 and +0.04 in. By considering two cycles before and two cycles after the maximum
load is reached, the data would be bracketed along the load axis between those cycles. For
each cycle bracketed, there will be a set of data for positive load and a set of data for
negative load. A least-squares fit is then used to fit a line through the data. The total
number of lines will depend on the number of cycles considered. An average line is then
determined. The parameter r4 is then determined by dividing the slope of the average line
by Ko. The parameter FI corresponds to the y intercept of the average line.
Stiffness and Strength Degradation Parameters
The stiffness degradation parameter influences the stiffness of secondary loops, while the
strength degradation parameter influences the maximum load secondary loops reach.
A simple study was conducted to determine the sensitivity of the overall response of a sheathing-
to-wood connection to these two parameters. The measured load-slip curve was compared to the
load-slip curve generated using the extracted parameters. The study was conducted by setting all
parameters constant, except α or β. Then, either α or β was also maintained constant while the
other parameter was varied by small increments. Figure 55 shows the result of one of the case
studies. For the case shown, β was set equal to 1.1, and α varied from 0.4 to 0.8 in 0.1
increments. The various curves in Figure 55 show that the load-slip response of a specimen is
not sensitive to small changes in α. In fact, the study shows that the load-slip response is not
sensitive to changes in the values of α and β. Reasonable values for α and β were around 0.6 and
1.1, respectively.
Introduction | 29
In this research, the stiffness degradation parameter, α, was set equal to 0.6, and the strength
degradation parameter, β, was set equal to 1.1.
Load-Slip Curves
A typical load-slip curve for each fastener type was generated using the parameters from their
specific load-slip curve. The measured and calculated curves for the typical perpendicular-to-
grain specimens fastened with a nail, wood screw, and staple are shown in figures 56, 57, and
58, respectively. There is very good agreement between the positive quadrant data of the actual
and calculated curves. The agreement is not so good in the negative quadrant because the data
shown for the computed curve were generated using the parameters extracted from the actual
positive quadrant data. The load-slip curve generated using the parameters will, therefore,
always be symmetric.
A set of ten parameters was extracted for each type of sheathing-to-wood connection. In order to
establish a curve for each connection type, the parameters for the ten tests conducted per group
were averaged. Figure 59 shows the measured load-slip curve and the load-slip curve generated
using the averaged parameters for that specific connection for a typical sheathing-to-wood
connection assembled with a nail perpendicular to the grain of the wood member. As seen in
Figure 59 the agreement between the measured curve and the average generated load-slip curve
is not very good. The reason is simply because the average curve cannot represent accurately an
individual measured curve.
Data Viewer
A data viewer was designed to present the ten parameters from each type of sheathing-to-wood
connection tested in this research initiative. Also included is the set of parameters for each
individual specimen. The data viewer also provided a way to easily link the parameters, the
actual data, and a picture of each specimen. The picture shows the specimen after testing. The
mode of failure of each specimen is also presented.
Another feature of the data viewer is a comparison of the theoretical strength values with the
actual values observed from testing. The theoretical values were obtained by using the NDS
yield mode calculations for a monotonically pulled connection. These values should indicate the
maximum load that the connection can be expected to resist and the initial yield mode of the
connection. The initial yield mode was not easily observed in the cyclic testing, but overall
calculated strength values correlated well with the measured values.
The data viewer was designed and constructed in a spreadsheet. A copy of the data viewer will
be made available from CUREE on a CD-ROM.
This page left intentionally blank.
Introduction | 31
References
American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM). 1988. ―Standard Test Methods for
Mechanical Fasteners in Wood,‖ ASTM D1761–88, Annual Book of Standard, ASTM,
Philadelphia, P.A.
American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM). 1992. ―Standard Test Methods for Direct
Moisture Content of Wood and Wood-Base Materials,‖ ASTM D4442–92, Annual Book of
Standard, ASTM, Philadelphia, P.A. American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM). 1993. ―Standard Test Methods for Specific
Gravity of Wood and Wood-Base Materials,‖ ASTM D2395–93, Annual Book of Standard,
ASTM, Philadelphia, P.A. American Institute of Timber Construction (AITC). 1994. Timber Construction Manual, 4th ed.,
AITC, Englewood, CO. American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM). 1995a. ―Standard Test Method for
Determining Bending Yield Moment of Nails,‖ ASTM F1575–95, Annual Book of
Standard, ASTM, Philadelphia, P.A. Faherty, Keith F., and Williamson, Thomas G. (eds.). 1995b. Wood Engineering and
Construction Handbook, 2nd ed., McGraw-Hill, New Your, NY.
American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM). 1996a. ―Standard Test Methods for
Evaluating Properties of Wood-Base Fiber and Particle Panel Materials,‖ ASTM D1037–
96a, Annual Book of Standard, ASTM, Philadelphia, P.A. American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM). 1996b. ―Standard Test Methods for
Mechanical Properties of Lumber and Wood-Base Materials,‖ ASTM D4761–96, Annual
Book of Standard, ASTM, Philadelphia, P.A. International Conference of Building Officials (ICBO). 1996c. Acceptance Criteria for Test
Method to Determine Bending Yield Moment of Nails, AC95. ICBO, Whittier, CA. International Conference of Building Officials (ICBO). 1996d. Acceptance Criteria for Wood
Screws, AC120. ICBO, Whittier, CA. American Forest and Paper Association (AF&PA). 1997a. National Design Specification for
Wood Construction and Supplement. 1997 ed., AF&PA, Washington, DC. National Evaluation Service Committee. 1997b. ―Power-Driven Staples and Nails for Use in All
Types of Building Construction,‖ Report No. NER-272, Council of American Building
Officials (Available from ISANTA, Chicago, IL). Rabe, Justin A. and Fonseca, Fernando S. 2000. ―The effect of Over-Driven Nails Heads on
Single Shear Connections with Oriented Strand Board Sheathing,‖ Technical Report No.
CES-00-04, Brigham Young University, Department of Civil and Environmental
Engineering, Provo, UT.
This page left intentionally blank.
Tables | 33
Tables
34 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
Table 1: Test Matrix
Test Test Sheathing Wood Moisture Fastener Edge Loading
No. Variable Name Member Condition Type Distance Direction Samples
01 Control 7/16 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry 8d Cooler Nail 3/8" 0 Perp 10
02 Control 7/16 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry 8d Cooler Nail 3/8" 0 Para 10
03 Task 1.1.1 3/8 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry 8d Cooler Nail 3/8" 0 Perp 10
04 Task 1.1.1 3/8 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry 8d Cooler Nail 3/8" 0 Para 10
05 Task 1.1.1 7/16 OSB mfg 1 DF-L Wet / Dry 8d Cooler Nail 3/8" 0 Perp 10
06 Task 1.1.1 7/16 OSB mfg 1 DF-L Wet / Dry 8d Cooler Nail 3/8" 0 Para 10
07 Task 1.1.1 19/32 OSB T&G DF-L Wet / Dry 10d Framing Nail 3/8" 0 Perp 10
08 Task 1.1.1 19/32 OSB T&G DF-L Wet / Dry 10d Framing Nail 3/8" 0 Para 10
09 OSB Density 3/8 OSB mfg 1 DF-L Wet / Dry 8d Cooler Nail 3/8" 0 Perp 10
10 OSB Density 3/8 OSB mfg 1 DF-L Wet / Dry 8d Cooler Nail 3/8" 0 Para 10
11 OSB Density 19/32 OSB mfg 1 DF-L Wet / Dry 8d Cooler Nail 3/8" 0 Perp 10
12 OSB Density 19/32 OSB mfg 1 DF-L Wet / Dry 8d Cooler Nail 3/8" 0 Para 10
13 OSB Density 3/8 OSB mfg 2 DF-L Wet / Dry 8d Cooler Nail 3/8" 0 Perp 10
14 OSB Density 3/8 OSB mfg 2 DF-L Wet / Dry 8d Cooler Nail 3/8" 0 Para 10
15 OSB Density 19/32 OSB mfg 2 DF-L Wet / Dry 8d Cooler Nail 3/8" 0 Perp 10
16 OSB Density 19/32 OSB mfg 2 DF-L Wet / Dry 8d Cooler Nail 3/8" 0 Para 10
Over-
driven
Depth
Tables | 35
Table 1 (Cont.): Test Matrix
Test Test Sheathing Wood Moisture Fastener Edge Loading
No. Variable Name Member Condition Type Distance Direction Samples
17 Panel 15/32 PLY std DF-L Wet / Dry 8d Cooler Nail 3/8" 0 Perp 10
18 Panel 15/32 PLY std DF-L Wet / Dry 8d Cooler Nail 3/8" 0 Para 10
19 Panel 2 Layers 7/16 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry 8d Cooler Nail 3/8" 0 Perp 10
20 Panel 2 Layers 7/16 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry 8d Cooler Nail 3/8" 0 Para 10
21 Panel 2 Layers 19/32 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry 8d Cooler Nail 3/8" 0 Perp 10
22 Panel 2 Layers 19/32 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry 8d Cooler Nail 3/8" 0 Para 10
23 Wood Member 7/16 OSB std PT HF Wet / Dry 8d Cooler Nail 3/8" 0 Perp 10
24 Wood Member 7/16 OSB std PT HF Wet / Dry 8d Cooler Nail 3/8" 0 Para 10
25 Moisture Condition 7/16 OSB std DF-L Dry / Dry 8d Cooler Nail 3/8" 0 Perp 10
26 Moisture Condition 7/16 OSB std DF-L Dry / Dry 8d Cooler Nail 3/8" 0 Para 10
27 Nail Overdrive 7/16 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry 8d Cooler Nail 3/8" -1/16 Perp 10
28 Nail Overdrive 7/16 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry 8d Cooler Nail 3/8" -1/16 Para 10
29 Nail Overdrive 7/16 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry 8d Cooler Nail 3/8" +1/16 Perp 10
30 Nail Overdrive 7/16 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry 8d Cooler Nail 3/8" +1/16 Para 10
31 Nail Overdrive 7/16 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry 8d Cooler Nail 3/8" +1/8 Perp 10
32 Nail Overdrive 7/16 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry 8d Cooler Nail 3/8" +1/8 Para 10
Over-
driven
Depth
36 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
Table 1 (Cont.): Test Matrix
Test Test Sheathing Wood Moisture Fastener Edge Loading
No. Variable Name Member Condition Type Distance Direction Samples
33 Nail Overdrive 7/16 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry 8d Cooler Nail 3/8" +3/16 Perp 10
34 Nail Overdrive 7/16 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry 8d Cooler Nail 3/8" +3/16 Para 10
35 Limited Penetration 7/16 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry 8d Cooler Nail L1 3/8" 0 Perp 10
36 Limited Penetration 7/16 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry 8d Cooler Nail L1 3/8" 0 Para 10
37 Limited Penetration 7/16 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry 8d Cooler Nail L2 3/8" 0 Perp 10
38 Limited Penetration 7/16 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry 8d Cooler Nail L2 3/8" 0 Para 10
39 Fastener Common 7/16 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry 8d Common Nail 3/8" 0 Perp 10
40 Fastener Common 7/16 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry 8d Common Nail 3/8" 0 Para 10
41 Fastener Common 7/16 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry 10d Common Nail 3/8" 0 Perp 10
42 Fastener Common 7/16 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry 10d Common Nail 3/8" 0 Para 10
43 Fastener Common 19/32 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry 8d Common Nail 3/8" 0 Perp 10
44 Fastener Common 19/32 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry 8d Common Nail 3/8" 0 Para 10
45 Fastener Common 19/32 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry 10d Common Nail 3/8" 0 Perp 10
46 Fastener Common 19/32 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry 10d Common Nail 3/8" 0 Para 10
47 Fastener Common 3/8 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry 8d Common Nail 3/8" 0 Perp 10
48 Fastener Common 3/8 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry 8d Common Nail 3/8" 0 Para 10
Over-
driven
Depth
Tables | 37
Table 1 (Cont.): Test Matrix
Test Test Sheathing Wood Moisture Fastener Edge Loading
No. Variable Name Member Condition Type Distance Direction Samples
51 Fastener Size 7/16 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry 10d Framing Nail 3/8" 0 Perp 10
52 Fastener Size 7/16 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry 10d Framing Nail 3/8" 0 Para 10
53 Fastener Size 19/32 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry 10d Framing Nail 3/8" 0 Perp 10
54 Fastener Size 19/32 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry 10d Framing Nail 3/8" 0 Para 10
55 Fastener Staple 7/16 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry 16ga. Staple 3/8" 0 Perp 10
56 Fastener Staple 7/16 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry 16ga. Staple 3/8" 0 Para 10
57 Fastener Staple 15/32 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry 16ga. Staple 3/8" 0 Perp 10
58 Fastener Staple 15/32 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry 16ga. Staple 3/8" 0 Para 10
63 Staple Overdrive 7/16 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry 16ga. Staple 3/8" -1/16 Perp 10
64 Staple Overdrive 7/16 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry 16ga. Staple 3/8" -1/16 Para 10
65 Staple Overdrive 7/16 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry 16ga. Staple 3/8" +1/16 Perp 10
66 Staple Overdrive 7/16 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry 16ga. Staple 3/8" +1/16 Para 10
67 Staple Overdrive 7/16 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry 16ga. Staple 3/8" +1/8 Perp 10
68 Staple Overdrive 7/16 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry 16ga. Staple 3/8" +1/8 Para 10
69 Staple Overdrive 7/16 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry 16ga. Staple 3/8" +3/16 Perp 10
70 Staple Overdrive 7/16 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry 16ga. Staple 3/8" +3/16 Para 10
Over-
driven
Depth
38 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
Table 1 (Cont.): Test Matrix
Test Test Sheathing Wood Moisture Fastener Edge Loading
No. Variable Name Member Condition Type Distance Direction Samples
81 Fastener Screw 7/16 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry #8 Rolled-Hardened L1 3/8" 0 Perp 10
82 Fastener Screw 7/16 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry #8 Rolled-Hardened L1 3/8" 0 Para 10
83 Fastener Screw 7/16 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry #10 Rolled Hardened 3/8" 0 Perp 10
84 Fastener Screw 7/16 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry #10 Rolled Hardened 3/8" 0 Para 10
85 Edge Distance 7/16 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry 8d Cooler Nail 1/4" 0 Perp 10
86 Edge Distance 7/16 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry 8d Cooler Nail 1/4' 0 Para 10
87 Edge Distance 7/16 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry 8d Cooler Nail 3/16" 0 Perp 10
88 Edge Distance 7/16 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry 8d Cooler Nail 3/16" 0 Para 10
89 Edge Distance 7/16 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry 8d Cooler Nail 1/8" 0 Perp 10
90 Edge Distance 7/16 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry 8d Cooler Nail 1/8" 0 Para 10
91 Limited Penetration 7/16 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry 8d Common Nail L1 3/8" 0 Perp 10
92 Limited Penetration 7/16 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry 8d Common Nail L1 3/8" 0 Para 10
93 Limited Penetration 7/16 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry 8d Common Nail L2 3/8" 0 Perp 10
94 Limited Penetration 7/16 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry 8d Common Nail L2 3/8" 0 Para 10
95 Fastener Screw 7/16 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry #8 Rolled-Hardened L2 3/8" 0 Perp 10
96 Fastener Screw 7/16 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry #8 Rolled-Hardened L2 3/8" 0 Para 10
Over-
driven
Depth
Tables | 39
Table 1 (Cont.): Test Matrix
Test Test Sheathing Wood Moisture Fastener Edge Loading
No. Variable Name Member Condition Type Distance Direction Samples
97 Edge Distance 7/16 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry 8d Cooler Nail + 2" 0 Perp 10
98 Edge Distance 7/16 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry 8d Cooler Nail + 2" 0 Para 10
99 Edge Distance 7/16 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry 8d Cooler Nail 2" 0 Perp 10
100 Edge Distance 7/16 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry 8d Cooler Nail 2" 0 Para 10
101 10d short Normal 7/16 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry 10d Common Short 3/8" 0 Perp 10
102 10d short Normal 7/16 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry 10d Common Short 3/8" 0 Para 10
103 10d short Flat 7/16 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry 10d Common Short 3/8" 0 Perp 10
104 10d short Flat 7/16 OSB std DF-L Wet / Dry 10d Common Short 3/8" 0 Para 10
Over-
driven
Depth
40 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
Table 2: Sheathing Panel Manufacturers
Name Thickness (in) Type1 Manufacturer
Ainsworth
Louisiana Pacific
Slocan Group
Ainsworth
Slocan Group
15/32 OSB 15/32 OSB Louisiana Pacific
Boise Cascade
Louisiana Pacific
Tolko Industries
Weyerhaeuser
15/32 PLY 15/32 Plywood Unknown
1 OSB stands for Oriented Strand Board
Sheathing
3/8 OSB 3/8 OSB
7/16 OSB 7/16 OSB
19/32 OSB 19/32 OSB
Tables | 41
Table 3: Density of the Oriented Strand Board Sheathing Panels
Sheathing Sample Initial Final Moisture Volume Density
Name Number Weight (g) Weight (g) Content (in3) sp gr
1 (pcf)
01 72.04 69.59 3.5% 7.09 0.60 37.3
02 69.19 67.06 3.2% 6.88 0.59 37.1
03 77.11 74.73 3.2% 6.91 0.66 41.1
Average 3.3% 0.62 38.5
01 66.73 63.98 4.3% 6.59 0.59 36.9
02 70.99 68.04 4.3% 6.69 0.62 38.7
03 72.75 69.66 4.4% 6.69 0.63 39.6
Average 4.4% 0.62 38.4
01 71.28 69.28 2.9% 6.85 0.62 38.5
02 71.67 69.60 3.0% 6.90 0.61 38.4
03 73.31 71.19 3.0% 6.98 0.62 38.8
Average 2.9% 0.62 38.6
01 84.17 81.86 2.8% 7.88 0.63 39.5
02 81.35 78.62 3.5% 7.93 0.60 37.7
03 81.76 78.85 3.7% 7.97 0.60 37.7
Average 3.3% 0.61 38.3
01 83.00 79.85 3.9% 8.02 0.61 37.9
02 82.50 79.43 3.9% 7.86 0.62 38.5
03 83.31 80.28 3.8% 7.89 0.62 38.7
Average 3.9% 0.61 38.4
01 99.89 95.07 5.1% 8.84 0.66 40.9
02 96.25 91.60 5.1% 8.70 0.64 40.1
03 97.87 93.18 5.0% 8.72 0.65 40.7
Average 5.1% 0.65 40.6
1 sp gr stands for specific gravity
15/32 OSB
std
3/8 OSB
std
3/8 OSB
mfg 1
3/8 OSB
mfg 2
7/16 OSB
std
7/16 OSB
mfg 1
42 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
Table 3 (Cont.): Density of the Oriented Strand Board Sheathing Panels
Panel Sample Initial Final Moisture Volume Density
Type Number Weight (g) Weight (g) Content (in3) sp gr
1 (pcf)
01 128.32 122.98 4.3% 10.85 0.69 43.1
02 106.55 102.46 4.0% 10.52 0.59 37.1
03 100.83 97.15 3.8% 10.62 0.56 34.8
Average 4.0% 0.61 38.3
01 108.21 103.86 4.2% 10.13 0.63 39.0
02 110.32 105.64 4.4% 10.27 0.63 39.1
03 103.04 98.84 4.2% 10.19 0.59 36.9
Average 4.3% 0.61 38.4
01 111.08 107.00 3.8% 10.37 0.63 39.3
02 107.02 103.29 3.6% 10.35 0.61 38.0
03 110.88 107.02 3.6% 10.37 0.63 39.3
Average 3.7% 0.62 38.9
01 110.21 106.11 3.9% 10.55 0.61 38.3
02 109.41 105.50 3.7% 10.68 0.60 37.6
03 108.68 104.95 3.6% 10.64 0.60 37.6
Average 3.7% 0.61 37.8
01 69.54 65.99 5.4% 7.77 0.52 32.3
02 71.79 68.04 5.5% 7.84 0.53 33.0
03 66.81 63.41 5.4% 7.83 0.49 30.8
Average 5.4% 0.51 32.11 sp gr stands for specific gravity
19/32 OSB
std
19/32 OSB
T & G
15/32 PLY
std
19/32 OSB
mfg 2
19/32 OSB
mfg 1
Tables | 43
Table 4: Lumber Moisture Content at Assembly
Board Moisture Board Moisture
Number Date Content Comments Number Date Content Comments
001 28-Jun-00 44.0% 026 19-Oct-00 29.3%
002 20-Jun-00 26.3% 027 19-Oct-00 37.8%
003 20-Jun-00 26.2% 028 19-Oct-00 49.1%
004 20-Jun-00 31.5% 029 30-Oct-00 26.8%
005 23-Jun-00 37.5% 030 30-Oct-00 26.8%
006 20-Jun-00 36.6% 031 30-Oct-00 22.5%
007 20-Jun-00 29.2% 032 30-Oct-00 24.0%
008 20-Jun-00 30.4% 033 30-Oct-00 26.7%
009 20-Jun-00 28.4% 034 30-Oct-00 24.2%
010 31-Jul-00 27.5% 035 30-Oct-00 34.5%
011 - - Not Used 036 30-Oct-00 18.7% Too Dry
012 31-Jul-00 38.0% 037 30-Oct-00 18.8% Too Dry
013 31-Jul-00 32.7% 038 13-Nov-00 28.9%
014 31-Jul-00 28.8% 039 13-Nov-00 27.8%
015 1-Aug-00 27.0% 040 15-Nov-00 44.8%
016 1-Aug-00 24.4% 041 15-Nov-00 27.7%
017 1-Aug-00 29.9% 042 17-Nov-00 44.2%
018 1-Aug-00 40.1% 043 15-Nov-00 47.3%
019 1-Aug-00 26.8% 044 - - Not Used
020 1-Aug-00 27.0% 045 17-Nov-00 27.3%
021 1-Aug-00 26.6% 046 17-Nov-00 27.6%
022 2-Oct-00 27.2% 047 17-Nov-00 35.9%
023 2-Oct-00 25.4% 048 17-Nov-00 8.0% Dry Sample
024 2-Oct-00 28.0% 049 18-Nov-00 29.8%
025 19-Oct-00 28.3% 050 18-Nov-00 31.4%
44 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
Table 4 (Cont.): Lumber Moisture Content at Assembly
Board Moisture Board Moisture
Number Date Content Comments Number Date Content Comments
051 18-Nov-00 32.3% 066 - - Not Used
052 18-Nov-00 28.2% 067 9-Dec-00 26.8%
053 29-Nov-00 26.0% 068 - - Not Used
054 29-Nov-00 26.7% 069 - - Not Used
055 29-Nov-00 28.2% 070 8-May-01 36.3%
056 29-Nov-00 29.4% 071 8-May-01 25.9%
057 9-Dec-00 25.5% 072 21-May-01 33.1%
058 9-Dec-00 49.9%
059 9-Dec-00 24.7%
060 9-Dec-00 30.7%
061 9-Dec-00 42.9%
062 9-Dec-00 48.1%
063 9-Dec-00 39.5%
064 9-Dec-00 29.3%
065 9-Dec-00 26.6%
Tables | 45
Table 5: Lumber Moisture Content at Testing
Sample Moisture Sample Moisture Sample Moisture Sample Moisture
Number Content Number Content Number Content Number Content
01-01 < 6.0% 03-06 6.8% 06-01 6.6% 08-06 6.4%
01-02 < 6.0% 03-07 6.7% 06-02 7.7% 08-07 7.8%
01-03 < 6.0% 03-08 7.4% 06-03 7.0% 08-08 6.6%
01-04 6.1% 03-09 8.0% 06-04 11.3% 08-09 8.8%
01-05 < 6.0% 03-10 6.5% 06-05 7.6% 08-10 7.1%
01-06 < 6.0% 04-01 6.5% 06-06 8.0% 09-01 7.1%
01-07 6.2% 04-02 6.7% 06-07 10.2% 09-02 6.8%
01-08 < 6.0% 04-03 6.8% 06-08 7.8% 09-03 6.4%
01-09 6.2% 04-04 6.4% 06-09 11.1% 09-04 6.5%
01-10 6.4% 04-05 7.6% 06-10 11.2% 09-05 6.8%
02-01 6.1% 04-06 6.2% 07-01 7.0% 09-06 7.9%
02-02 < 6.0% 04-07 6.5% 07-02 6.9% 09-07 6.8%
02-03 6.3% 04-08 < 6.0% 07-03 6.2% 09-08 6.8%
02-04 < 6.0% 04-09 6.3% 07-04 7.1% 09-09 7.4%
02-05 < 6.0% 04-10 6.6% 07-05 7.7% 09-10 7.8%
02-06 < 6.0% 05-01 < 6.0% 07-06 7.2% 10-01 7.5%
02-07 < 6.0% 05-02 7.8% 07-07 6.9% 10-02 6.6%
02-08 6.5% 05-03 7.1% 07-08 7.1% 10-03 7.5%
02-09 < 6.0% 05-04 6.9% 07-09 8.0% 10-04 7.1%
02-10 6.4% 05-05 6.2% 07-10 < 6.0% 10-05 6.8%
03-01 7.1% 05-06 < 6.0% 08-01 6.7% 10-06 7.2%
03-02 7.2% 05-07 6.6% 08-02 7.2% 10-07 7.3%
03-03 < 6.0% 05-08 < 6.0% 08-03 9.1% 10-08 7.1%
03-04 6.6% 05-09 6.8% 08-04 6.7% 10-09 7.1%
03-05 6.4% 05-10 6.5% 08-05 8.7% 10-10 7.3%
46 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
Table 5 (Cont.): Lumber Moisture Content at Testing
Sample Moisture Sample Moisture Sample Moisture Sample Moisture
Number Content Number Content Number Content Number Content
11-01 7.1% 13-06 8.9% 16-01 7.5% 18-06 11.1%
11-02 7.3% 13-07 8.0% 16-02 6.7% 18-07 10.7%
11-03 6.6% 13-08 7.7% 16-03 6.7% 18-08 8.7%
11-04 6.5% 13-09 7.8% 16-04 8.0% 18-09 10.3%
11-05 7.0% 13-10 10.9% 16-05 7.9% 18-10 9.9%
11-06 6.8% 14-01 8.8% 16-06 7.2% 19-01 6.3%
11-07 7.5% 14-02 10.8% 16-07 7.3% 19-02 6.3%
11-08 6.7% 14-03 8.0% 16-08 8.6% 19-03 6.4%
11-09 6.6% 14-04 10.0% 16-09 8.2% 19-04 6.9%
11-10 6.6% 14-05 10.0% 16-10 6.8% 19-05 6.2%
12-01 7.3% 14-06 8.9% 17-01 7.2% 19-06 6.2%
12-02 6.2% 14-07 9.8% 17-02 < 6.0% 19-07 na
12-03 6.9% 14-08 8.3% 17-03 8.5% 19-08 6.5%
12-04 6.3% 14-09 8.7% 17-04 7.6% 19-09 6.3%
12-05 6.5% 14-10 7.9% 17-05 8.5% 19-10 6.5%
12-06 7.1% 15-01 9.6% 17-06 6.8% 20-01 < 6.0%
12-07 6.6% 15-02 7.0% 17-07 7.9% 20-02 < 6.0%
12-08 6.7% 15-03 10.6% 17-08 < 6.0% 20-03 < 6.0%
12-09 6.5% 15-04 8.9% 17-09 6.2% 20-04 < 6.0%
12-10 6.8% 15-05 6.8% 17-10 8.4% 20-05 7.1%
13-01 6.8% 15-06 7.2% 18-01 7.6% 20-06 6.3%
13-02 7.4% 15-07 7.8% 18-02 8.9% 20-07 7.1%
13-03 9.7% 15-08 7.2% 18-03 9.7% 20-08 6.9%
13-04 8.9% 15-09 7.5% 18-04 9.0% 20-09 7.1%
13-05 7.8% 15-10 7.7% 18-05 8.4% 20-10 < 6.0%
Tables | 47
Table 5 (Cont.): Lumber Moisture Content at Testing
Sample Moisture Sample Moisture Sample Moisture Sample Moisture
Number Content Number Content Number Content Number Content
21-01 6.1% 23-06 6.9% 26-01 7.6% 28-06 7.3%
21-02 7.3% 23-07 7.1% 26-02 7.3% 28-07 6.1%
21-03 7.4% 23-08 7.3% 26-03 7.7% 28-08 6.1%
21-04 8.3% 23-09 7.8% 26-04 7.8% 28-09 6.3%
21-05 10.0% 23-10 6.7% 26-05 7.7% 28-10 6.3%
21-06 10.8% 24-01 < 6.0% 26-06 7.9% 29-01 < 6.0%
21-07 7.0% 24-02 < 6.0% 26-07 7.3% 29-02 < 6.0%
21-08 7.3% 24-03 < 6.0% 26-08 8.0% 29-03 < 6.0%
21-09 8.5% 24-04 < 6.0% 26-09 7.8% 29-04 < 6.0%
21-10 7.1% 24-05 < 6.0% 26-10 7.7% 29-05 na
22-01 7.7% 24-06 < 6.0% 27-01 6.5% 29-06 6.2%
22-02 < 6.0% 24-07 < 6.0% 27-02 6.4% 29-07 < 6.0%
22-03 < 6.0% 24-08 6.5% 27-03 6.2% 29-08 < 6.0%
22-04 6.3% 24-09 < 6.0% 27-04 < 6.0% 29-09 < 6.0%
22-05 < 6.0% 24-10 < 6.0% 27-05 6.8% 29-10 < 6.0%
22-06 7.2% 25-01 8.5% 27-06 6.2% 30-01 < 6.0%
22-07 7.1% 25-02 8.4% 27-07 6.7% 30-02 < 6.0%
22-08 5.7% 25-03 8.7% 27-08 6.7% 30-03 < 6.0%
22-09 7.2% 25-04 8.4% 27-09 6.6% 30-04 < 6.0%
22-10 7.6% 25-05 8.9% 27-10 6.7% 30-05 6.1%
23-01 6.7% 25-06 8.0% 28-01 6.8% 30-06 7.2%
23-02 6.7% 25-07 8.8% 28-02 6.8% 30-07 < 6.0%
23-03 7.0% 25-08 8.0% 28-03 6.7% 30-08 < 6.0%
23-04 8.0% 25-09 7.8% 28-04 6.5% 30-09 < 6.0%
23-05 6.8% 25-10 8.5% 28-05 6.7% 30-10 < 6.0%
48 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
Table 5 (Cont.): Lumber Moisture Content at Testing
Sample Moisture Sample Moisture Sample Moisture Sample Moisture
Number Content Number Content Number Content Number Content
31-01 6.2% 33-06 6.5% 36-01 8.2% 38-06 8.0%
31-02 6.2% 33-07 6.3% 36-02 7.4% 38-07 7.1%
31-03 6.4% 33-08 6.1% 36-03 8.4% 38-08 7.1%
31-04 < 6.0% 33-09 6.3% 36-04 9.1% 38-09 7.6%
31-05 6.6% 33-10 6.1% 36-05 7.8% 38-10 11.9%
31-06 < 6.0% 34-01 7.0% 36-06 8.2% 39-01 7.4%
31-07 < 6.0% 34-02 < 6.0% 36-07 8.5% 39-02 10.2%
31-08 6.9% 34-03 6.1% 36-08 8.6% 39-03 8.1%
31-09 6.8% 34-04 < 6.0% 36-09 6.4% 39-04 7.9%
31-10 6.4% 34-05 6.2% 36-10 8.5% 39-05 7.8%
32-01 6.7% 34-06 10.0% 37-01 6.8% 39-06 8.0%
32-02 7.0% 34-07 6.6% 37-02 6.2% 39-07 7.8%
32-03 6.7% 34-08 < 6.0% 37-03 6.5% 39-08 8.4%
32-04 7.1% 34-09 7.2% 37-04 na 39-09 8.6%
32-05 < 6.0% 34-10 < 6.0% 37-05 6.7% 39-10 8.4%
32-06 6.1% 35-01 < 6.0% 37-06 6.5% 40-01 9.0%
32-07 6.4% 35-02 6.6% 37-07 7.0% 40-02 6.8%
32-08 < 6.0% 35-03 6.6% 37-08 7.9% 40-03 8.4%
32-09 < 6.0% 35-04 9.9% 37-09 7.2% 40-04 7.7%
32-10 7.1% 35-05 13.5% 37-10 7.8% 40-05 7.6%
33-01 6.8% 35-06 10.7% 38-01 11.4% 40-06 7.9%
33-02 6.1% 35-07 6.6% 38-02 10.2% 40-07 8.5%
33-03 6.5% 35-08 7.4% 38-03 7.3% 40-08 8.2%
33-04 6.2% 35-09 6.3% 38-04 8.0% 40-09 6.7%
33-05 6.2% 35-10 6.7% 38-05 7.2% 40-10 7.3%
Tables | 49
Table 5 (Cont.): Lumber Moisture Content at Testing
Sample Moisture Sample Moisture Sample Moisture Sample Moisture
Number Content Number Content Number Content Number Content
41-01 6.7% 43-06 8.0% 46-01 6.3% 48-06 7.8%
41-02 8.7% 43-07 6.8% 46-02 6.6% 48-07 6.6%
41-03 6.5% 43-08 6.4% 46-03 6.8% 48-08 8.1%
41-04 7.0% 43-09 na 46-04 11.1% 48-09 7.8%
41-05 7.7% 43-10 6.6% 46-05 6.9% 48-10 7.1%
41-06 7.7% 44-01 8.2% 46-06 7.0% 51-01 7.4%
41-07 6.7% 44-02 6.9% 46-07 6.5% 51-02 7.3%
41-08 7.2% 44-03 7.1% 46-08 10.4% 51-03 < 6.0%
41-09 6.3% 44-04 8.6% 46-09 7.4% 51-04 6.7%
41-10 6.6% 44-05 7.1% 46-10 6.6% 51-05 na
42-01 6.6% 44-06 8.9% 47-01 6.2% 51-06 6.1%
42-02 7.4% 44-07 7.1% 47-02 7.9% 51-07 6.3%
42-03 7.3% 44-08 6.5% 47-03 7.0% 51-08 6.3%
42-04 7.5% 44-09 6.9% 47-04 6.5% 51-09 6.5%
42-05 6.7% 44-10 7.6% 47-05 6.6% 51-10 8.1%
42-06 6.1% 45-01 6.4% 47-06 7.1% 52-01 6.1%
42-07 8.5% 45-02 7.9% 47-07 7.7% 52-02 < 6.0%
42-08 7.8% 45-03 8.6% 47-08 6.3% 52-03 < 6.0%
42-09 7.1% 45-04 10.0% 47-09 < 6.0% 52-04 < 6.0%
42-10 7.3% 45-05 6.5% 47-10 6.3% 52-05 6.7%
43-01 6.6% 45-06 6.5% 48-01 7.3% 52-06 6.6%
43-02 6.7% 45-07 7.7% 48-02 7.9% 52-07 < 6.0%
43-03 10.5% 45-08 na 48-03 7.6% 52-08 < 6.0%
43-04 7.0% 45-09 9.4% 48-04 8.4% 52-09 < 6.0%
43-05 8.0% 45-10 < 6.0% 48-05 6.8% 52-10 < 6.0%
50 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
Table 5 (Cont.): Lumber Moisture Content at Testing
Sample Moisture Sample Moisture Sample Moisture Sample Moisture
Number Content Number Content Number Content Number Content
53-01 6.8% 55-06 < 6.0% 58-01 6.7% 64-06 7.1%
53-02 6.8% 55-07 7.6% 58-02 6.6% 64-07 6.6%
53-03 7.6% 55-08 6.9% 58-03 7.5% 64-08 6.5%
53-04 8.0% 55-09 7.5% 58-04 7.7% 64-09 6.3%
53-05 6.6% 55-10 6.9% 58-05 6.3% 64-10 6.4%
53-06 6.6% 56-01 6.7% 58-06 7.8% 65-01 6.3%
53-07 < 6.0% 56-02 6.5% 58-07 7.5% 65-02 6.3%
53-08 7.0% 56-03 6.7% 58-08 7.8% 65-03 < 6.0%
53-09 6.7% 56-04 6.5% 58-09 7.8% 65-04 6.6%
53-10 6.4% 56-05 6.3% 58-10 8.2% 65-05 < 6.0%
54-01 < 6.0% 56-06 6.5% 63-01 6.2% 65-06 6.4%
54-02 6.8% 56-07 6.6% 63-02 < 6.0% 65-07 6.1%
54-03 < 6.0% 56-08 7.4% 63-03 < 6.0% 65-08 6.2%
54-04 6.4% 56-09 7.9% 63-04 < 6.0% 65-09 6.6%
54-05 6.7% 56-10 6.8% 63-05 6.8% 65-10 < 6.0%
54-06 6.7% 57-01 6.8% 63-06 < 6.0% 66-01 6.4%
54-07 < 6.0% 57-02 7.9% 63-07 < 6.0% 66-02 6.6%
54-08 6.9% 57-03 < 6.0% 63-08 < 6.0% 66-03 7.0%
54-09 6.4% 57-04 6.2% 63-09 < 6.0% 66-04 7.7%
54-10 6.6% 57-05 6.3% 63-10 < 6.0% 66-05 6.3%
55-01 7.2% 57-06 6.5% 64-01 6.3% 66-06 6.4%
55-02 7.3% 57-07 < 6.0% 64-02 6.8% 66-07 7.9%
55-03 6.7% 57-08 7.5% 64-03 6.5% 66-08 6.9%
55-04 7.3% 57-09 6.8% 64-04 6.3% 66-09 6.4%
55-05 8.1% 57-10 7.9% 64-05 6.3% 66-10 6.5%
Tables | 51
Table 5 (Cont.): Lumber Moisture Content at Testing
Sample Moisture Sample Moisture Sample Moisture Sample Moisture
Number Content Number Content Number Content Number Content
67-01 < 6.0% 69-06 6.2% 82-01 6.8% 84-06 11.7%
67-02 < 6.0% 69-07 6.4% 82-02 6.8% 84-07 6.5%
67-03 6.3% 69-08 6.3% 82-03 7.9% 84-08 6.9%
67-04 < 6.0% 69-09 6.4% 82-04 6.3% 84-09 7.0%
67-05 < 6.0% 69-10 6.8% 82-05 6.1% 84-10 7.0%
67-06 < 6.0% 70-01 6.6% 82-06 7.8% 85-01 10.6%
67-07 < 6.0% 70-02 6.4% 82-07 6.6% 85-02 6.5%
67-08 6.2% 70-03 6.8% 82-08 8.1% 85-03 6.1%
67-09 7.5% 70-04 6.4% 82-09 7.7% 85-04 8.2%
67-10 6.6% 70-05 6.7% 82-10 8.3% 85-05 8.3%
68-01 7.2% 70-06 7.6% 83-01 6.5% 85-06 10.3%
68-02 6.9% 70-07 7.1% 83-02 6.4% 85-07 7.8%
68-03 7.3% 70-08 6.3% 83-03 < 6.0% 85-08 6.7%
68-04 6.5% 70-09 6.3% 83-04 6.4% 85-09 7.5%
68-05 < 6.0% 70-10 < 6.0% 83-05 7.2% 85-10 6.4%
68-06 < 6.0% 81-01 8.0% 83-06 < 6.0% 86-01 < 6.0%
68-07 < 6.0% 81-02 < 6.0% 83-07 6.5% 86-02 < 6.0%
68-08 7.9% 81-03 7.0% 83-08 6.9% 86-03 6.4%
68-09 < 6.0% 81-04 7.1% 83-09 < 6.0% 86-04 < 6.0%
68-10 11.9% 81-05 < 6.0% 83-10 6.9% 86-05 < 6.0%
69-01 6.9% 81-06 na 84-01 6.9% 86-06 < 6.0%
69-02 < 6.0% 81-07 7.1% 84-02 10.6% 86-07 6.5%
69-03 6.8% 81-08 < 6.0% 84-03 6.5% 86-08 6.1%
69-04 6.1% 81-09 6.5% 84-04 6.9% 86-09 6.4%
69-05 6.6% 81-10 6.5% 84-05 9.4% 86-10 7.3%
52 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
Table 5 (Cont.): Lumber Moisture Content at Testing
Sample Moisture Sample Moisture Sample Moisture Sample Moisture
Number Content Number Content Number Content Number Content
87-01 7.8% 89-06 7.6% 92-01 6.7% 94-06 9.0%
87-02 < 6.0% 89-07 7.7% 92-02 na 94-07 6.4%
87-03 < 6.0% 89-08 7.7% 92-03 6.2% 94-08 6.6%
87-04 7.2% 89-09 9.1% 92-04 7.8% 94-09 6.6%
87-05 6.6% 89-10 9.8% 92-05 6.6% 94-10 6.9%
87-06 6.9% 90-01 9.4% 92-06 7.2% 95-01 7.8%
87-07 6.9% 90-02 12.2% 92-07 6.6% 95-02 7.0%
87-08 7.8% 90-03 9.3% 92-08 < 6.0% 95-03 6.2%
87-09 < 6.0% 90-04 9.4% 92-09 8.0% 95-04 7.2%
87-10 < 6.0% 90-05 9.1% 92-10 6.4% 95-05 7.1%
88-01 < 6.0% 90-06 10.2% 93-01 6.3% 95-06 7.2%
88-02 < 6.0% 90-07 7.3% 93-02 11.9% 95-07 7.0%
88-03 < 6.0% 90-08 7.8% 93-03 < 6.0% 95-08 6.3%
88-04 7.6% 90-09 7.3% 93-04 6.6% 95-09 8.3%
88-05 6.6% 90-10 < 6.0% 93-05 6.9% 95-10 < 6.0%
88-06 < 6.0% 91-01 7.6% 93-06 8.8% 96-01 6.3%
88-07 6.2% 91-02 7.4% 93-07 7.9% 96-02 6.6%
88-08 6.7% 91-03 < 6.0% 93-08 7.4% 96-03 8.4%
88-09 6.8% 91-04 7.7% 93-09 6.3% 96-04 8.5%
88-10 6.6% 91-05 7.4% 93-10 11.2% 96-05 6.7%
89-01 6.9% 91-06 7.1% 94-01 6.2% 96-06 6.5%
89-02 6.1% 91-07 6.9% 94-02 6.4% 96-07 6.6%
89-03 7.0% 91-08 7.2% 94-03 6.6% 96-08 8.1%
89-04 8.6% 91-09 8.8% 94-04 6.5% 96-09 8.5%
89-05 9.2% 91-10 6.7% 94-05 7.7% 96-10 6.2%
Tables | 53
Table 6: Results of the Study Validating the Moisture Meter
Sample Sample Moisture Method B Percent
Type Number Meter Oven-Drying Difference
W1 26.5% 17.2% 54%
W2 27.3% 19.5% 40%
W3 27.9% 21.0% 33%
W4 33.0% 25.6% 29%
W5 25.2% 19.5% 29%
W6 27.0% 20.2% 34%
Average 27.8% 20.5% 36%
D1 8.2% 6.1% 33%
D2 8.3% 6.3% 32%
D3 8.1% 6.1% 33%
Average 8.2% 6.2% 33%
Dry
Wet
54 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
Table 7: Lumber Moisture Content at Assembly (Corrected)
Board Moisture Board Moisture
Number Date Content Comments Number Date Content Comments
001 28-Jun-00 32.4% 026 19-Oct-00 21.5%
002 20-Jun-00 19.3% 027 19-Oct-00 27.8%
003 20-Jun-00 19.3% 028 19-Oct-00 36.1%
004 20-Jun-00 23.2% 029 30-Oct-00 19.7%
005 23-Jun-00 27.6% 030 30-Oct-00 19.7%
006 20-Jun-00 26.9% 031 30-Oct-00 16.5%
007 20-Jun-00 21.5% 032 30-Oct-00 17.6%
008 20-Jun-00 22.4% 033 30-Oct-00 19.6%
009 20-Jun-00 20.9% 034 30-Oct-00 17.8%
010 31-Jul-00 20.2% 035 30-Oct-00 25.4%
011 - - Not Used 036 30-Oct-00 13.8% Too Dry
012 31-Jul-00 27.9% 037 30-Oct-00 13.8% Too Dry
013 31-Jul-00 24.0% 038 13-Nov-00 21.3%
014 31-Jul-00 21.2% 039 13-Nov-00 20.4%
015 1-Aug-00 19.9% 040 15-Nov-00 32.9%
016 1-Aug-00 17.9% 041 15-Nov-00 20.4%
017 1-Aug-00 22.0% 042 17-Nov-00 32.5%
018 1-Aug-00 29.5% 043 15-Nov-00 34.8%
019 1-Aug-00 19.7% 044 - - Not Used
020 1-Aug-00 19.9% 045 17-Nov-00 20.1%
021 1-Aug-00 19.6% 046 17-Nov-00 20.3%
022 2-Oct-00 20.0% 047 17-Nov-00 26.4%
023 2-Oct-00 18.7% 048 17-Nov-00 5.9% Dry Sample
024 2-Oct-00 20.6% 049 18-Nov-00 21.9%
025 19-Oct-00 20.8% 050 18-Nov-00 23.1%
Tables | 55
Table 7 (Cont.): Lumber Moisture Content at Assembly (Corrected)
Board Moisture Board Moisture
Number Date Content Comments Number Date Content Comments
051 18-Nov-00 23.8% 066 - - Not Used
052 18-Nov-00 20.7% 067 9-Dec-00 19.7%
053 29-Nov-00 19.1% 068 - - Not Used
054 29-Nov-00 19.6% 069 - - Not Used
055 29-Nov-00 20.7% 070 8-May-01 26.7%
056 29-Nov-00 21.6% 071 8-May-01 19.0%
057 9-Dec-00 18.8% 072 21-May-01 24.3%
058 9-Dec-00 36.7%
059 9-Dec-00 18.2%
060 9-Dec-00 22.6%
061 9-Dec-00 31.5%
062 9-Dec-00 35.4%
063 9-Dec-00 29.0%
064 9-Dec-00 21.5%
065 9-Dec-00 19.6%
56 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
Table 8: Lumber Moisture Content at Testing (Corrected)
Sample Moisture Sample Moisture Sample Moisture Sample Moisture
Number Content Number Content Number Content Number Content
01-01 < 4.5% 03-06 5.1% 06-01 5.0% 08-06 4.8%
01-02 < 4.5% 03-07 5.0% 06-02 5.8% 08-07 5.9%
01-03 < 4.5% 03-08 5.6% 06-03 5.3% 08-08 5.0%
01-04 4.6% 03-09 6.0% 06-04 8.5% 08-09 6.6%
01-05 < 4.5% 03-10 4.9% 06-05 5.7% 08-10 5.3%
01-06 < 4.5% 04-01 4.9% 06-06 6.0% 09-01 5.3%
01-07 4.7% 04-02 5.0% 06-07 7.7% 09-02 5.1%
01-08 < 4.5% 04-03 5.1% 06-08 5.9% 09-03 4.8%
01-09 4.7% 04-04 4.8% 06-09 8.3% 09-04 4.9%
01-10 4.8% 04-05 5.7% 06-10 8.4% 09-05 5.1%
02-01 4.6% 04-06 4.7% 07-01 5.3% 09-06 5.9%
02-02 < 4.5% 04-07 4.9% 07-02 5.2% 09-07 5.1%
02-03 4.7% 04-08 < 4.5% 07-03 4.7% 09-08 5.1%
02-04 < 4.5% 04-09 4.7% 07-04 5.3% 09-09 5.6%
02-05 < 4.5% 04-10 5.0% 07-05 5.8% 09-10 5.9%
02-06 < 4.5% 05-01 < 4.5% 07-06 5.4% 10-01 5.6%
02-07 < 4.5% 05-02 5.9% 07-07 5.2% 10-02 5.0%
02-08 4.9% 05-03 5.3% 07-08 5.3% 10-03 5.6%
02-09 < 4.5% 05-04 5.2% 07-09 6.0% 10-04 5.3%
02-10 4.8% 05-05 4.7% 07-10 < 4.5% 10-05 5.1%
03-01 5.3% 05-06 < 4.5% 08-01 5.0% 10-06 5.4%
03-02 5.4% 05-07 5.0% 08-02 5.4% 10-07 5.5%
03-03 < 4.5% 05-08 < 4.5% 08-03 6.8% 10-08 5.3%
03-04 5.0% 05-09 5.1% 08-04 5.0% 10-09 5.3%
03-05 4.8% 05-10 4.9% 08-05 6.5% 10-10 5.5%
Tables | 57
Table 8 (Cont.): Lumber Moisture Content at Testing (Corrected)
Sample Moisture Sample Moisture Sample Moisture Sample Moisture
Number Content Number Content Number Content Number Content
11-01 5.3% 13-06 6.7% 16-01 5.6% 18-06 8.3%
11-02 5.5% 13-07 6.0% 16-02 5.0% 18-07 8.0%
11-03 5.0% 13-08 5.8% 16-03 5.0% 18-08 6.5%
11-04 4.9% 13-09 5.9% 16-04 6.0% 18-09 7.7%
11-05 5.3% 13-10 8.2% 16-05 5.9% 18-10 7.4%
11-06 5.1% 14-01 6.6% 16-06 5.4% 19-01 4.7%
11-07 5.6% 14-02 8.1% 16-07 5.5% 19-02 4.7%
11-08 5.0% 14-03 6.0% 16-08 6.5% 19-03 4.8%
11-09 5.0% 14-04 7.5% 16-09 6.2% 19-04 5.2%
11-10 5.0% 14-05 7.5% 16-10 5.1% 19-05 4.7%
12-01 5.5% 14-06 6.7% 17-01 5.4% 19-06 4.7%
12-02 4.7% 14-07 7.4% 17-02 < 4.5% 19-07 na
12-03 5.2% 14-08 6.2% 17-03 6.4% 19-08 4.9%
12-04 4.7% 14-09 6.5% 17-04 5.7% 19-09 4.7%
12-05 4.9% 14-10 5.9% 17-05 6.4% 19-10 4.9%
12-06 5.3% 15-01 7.2% 17-06 5.1% 20-01 < 4.5%
12-07 5.0% 15-02 5.3% 17-07 5.9% 20-02 < 4.5%
12-08 5.0% 15-03 8.0% 17-08 < 4.5% 20-03 < 4.5%
12-09 4.9% 15-04 6.7% 17-09 4.7% 20-04 < 4.5%
12-10 5.1% 15-05 5.1% 17-10 6.3% 20-05 5.3%
13-01 5.1% 15-06 5.4% 18-01 5.7% 20-06 4.7%
13-02 5.6% 15-07 5.9% 18-02 6.7% 20-07 5.3%
13-03 7.3% 15-08 5.4% 18-03 7.3% 20-08 5.2%
13-04 6.7% 15-09 5.6% 18-04 6.8% 20-09 5.3%
13-05 5.9% 15-10 5.8% 18-05 6.3% 20-10 < 4.5%
58 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
Table 8 (Cont.): Lumber Moisture Content at Testing (Corrected)
Sample Moisture Sample Moisture Sample Moisture Sample Moisture
Number Content Number Content Number Content Number Content
21-01 4.6% 23-06 5.2% 26-01 5.7% 28-06 5.5%
21-02 5.5% 23-07 5.3% 26-02 5.5% 28-07 4.6%
21-03 5.6% 23-08 5.5% 26-03 5.8% 28-08 4.6%
21-04 6.2% 23-09 5.9% 26-04 5.9% 28-09 4.7%
21-05 7.5% 23-10 5.0% 26-05 5.8% 28-10 4.7%
21-06 8.1% 24-01 < 4.5% 26-06 5.9% 29-01 < 4.5%
21-07 5.3% 24-02 < 4.5% 26-07 5.5% 29-02 < 4.5%
21-08 5.5% 24-03 < 4.5% 26-08 6.0% 29-03 < 4.5%
21-09 6.4% 24-04 < 4.5% 26-09 5.9% 29-04 < 4.5%
21-10 5.3% 24-05 < 4.5% 26-10 5.8% 29-05 na
22-01 5.8% 24-06 < 4.5% 27-01 4.9% 29-06 4.7%
22-02 < 4.5% 24-07 < 4.5% 27-02 4.8% 29-07 < 4.5%
22-03 < 4.5% 24-08 4.9% 27-03 4.7% 29-08 < 4.5%
22-04 4.7% 24-09 < 4.5% 27-04 < 4.5% 29-09 < 4.5%
22-05 < 4.5% 24-10 < 4.5% 27-05 5.1% 29-10 < 4.5%
22-06 5.4% 25-01 6.4% 27-06 4.7% 30-01 < 4.5%
22-07 5.3% 25-02 6.3% 27-07 5.0% 30-02 < 4.5%
22-08 4.3% 25-03 6.5% 27-08 5.0% 30-03 < 4.5%
22-09 5.4% 25-04 6.3% 27-09 5.0% 30-04 < 4.5%
22-10 5.7% 25-05 6.7% 27-10 5.0% 30-05 4.6%
23-01 5.0% 25-06 6.0% 28-01 5.1% 30-06 5.4%
23-02 5.0% 25-07 6.6% 28-02 5.1% 30-07 < 4.5%
23-03 5.3% 25-08 6.0% 28-03 5.0% 30-08 < 4.5%
23-04 6.0% 25-09 5.9% 28-04 4.9% 30-09 < 4.5%
23-05 5.1% 25-10 6.4% 28-05 5.0% 30-10 < 4.5%
Tables | 59
Table 8 (Cont.): Lumber Moisture Content at Testing (Corrected)
Sample Moisture Sample Moisture Sample Moisture Sample Moisture
Number Content Number Content Number Content Number Content
31-01 4.7% 33-06 4.9% 36-01 6.2% 38-06 6.0%
31-02 4.7% 33-07 4.7% 36-02 5.6% 38-07 5.3%
31-03 4.8% 33-08 4.6% 36-03 6.3% 38-08 5.3%
31-04 < 4.5% 33-09 4.7% 36-04 6.8% 38-09 5.7%
31-05 5.0% 33-10 4.6% 36-05 5.9% 38-10 8.9%
31-06 < 4.5% 34-01 5.3% 36-06 6.2% 39-01 5.6%
31-07 < 4.5% 34-02 < 4.5% 36-07 6.4% 39-02 7.7%
31-08 5.2% 34-03 4.6% 36-08 6.5% 39-03 6.1%
31-09 5.1% 34-04 < 4.5% 36-09 4.8% 39-04 5.9%
31-10 4.8% 34-05 4.7% 36-10 6.4% 39-05 5.9%
32-01 5.0% 34-06 7.5% 37-01 5.1% 39-06 6.0%
32-02 5.3% 34-07 5.0% 37-02 4.7% 39-07 5.9%
32-03 5.0% 34-08 < 4.5% 37-03 4.9% 39-08 6.3%
32-04 5.3% 34-09 5.4% 37-04 na 39-09 6.5%
32-05 < 4.5% 34-10 < 4.5% 37-05 5.0% 39-10 6.3%
32-06 4.6% 35-01 < 4.5% 37-06 4.9% 40-01 6.8%
32-07 4.8% 35-02 5.0% 37-07 5.3% 40-02 5.1%
32-08 < 4.5% 35-03 5.0% 37-08 5.9% 40-03 6.3%
32-09 < 4.5% 35-04 7.4% 37-09 5.4% 40-04 5.8%
32-10 5.3% 35-05 10.2% 37-10 5.9% 40-05 5.7%
33-01 5.1% 35-06 8.0% 38-01 8.6% 40-06 5.9%
33-02 4.6% 35-07 5.0% 38-02 7.7% 40-07 6.4%
33-03 4.9% 35-08 5.6% 38-03 5.5% 40-08 6.2%
33-04 4.7% 35-09 4.7% 38-04 6.0% 40-09 5.0%
33-05 4.7% 35-10 5.0% 38-05 5.4% 40-10 5.5%
60 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
Table 8 (Cont.): Lumber Moisture Content at Testing (Corrected)
Sample Moisture Sample Moisture Sample Moisture Sample Moisture
Number Content Number Content Number Content Number Content
41-01 5.0% 43-06 6.0% 46-01 4.7% 48-06 5.9%
41-02 6.5% 43-07 5.1% 46-02 5.0% 48-07 5.0%
41-03 4.9% 43-08 4.8% 46-03 5.1% 48-08 6.1%
41-04 5.3% 43-09 na 46-04 8.3% 48-09 5.9%
41-05 5.8% 43-10 5.0% 46-05 5.2% 48-10 5.3%
41-06 5.8% 44-01 6.2% 46-06 5.3% 51-01 5.6%
41-07 5.0% 44-02 5.2% 46-07 4.9% 51-02 5.5%
41-08 5.4% 44-03 5.3% 46-08 7.8% 51-03 < 4.5%
41-09 4.7% 44-04 6.5% 46-09 5.6% 51-04 5.0%
41-10 5.0% 44-05 5.3% 46-10 5.0% 51-05 na
42-01 5.0% 44-06 6.7% 47-01 4.7% 51-06 4.6%
42-02 5.6% 44-07 5.3% 47-02 5.9% 51-07 4.7%
42-03 5.5% 44-08 4.9% 47-03 5.3% 51-08 4.7%
42-04 5.6% 44-09 5.2% 47-04 4.9% 51-09 4.9%
42-05 5.0% 44-10 5.7% 47-05 5.0% 51-10 6.1%
42-06 4.6% 45-01 4.8% 47-06 5.3% 52-01 4.6%
42-07 6.4% 45-02 5.9% 47-07 5.8% 52-02 < 4.5%
42-08 5.9% 45-03 6.5% 47-08 4.7% 52-03 < 4.5%
42-09 5.3% 45-04 7.5% 47-09 < 4.5% 52-04 < 4.5%
42-10 5.5% 45-05 4.9% 47-10 4.7% 52-05 5.0%
43-01 5.0% 45-06 4.9% 48-01 5.5% 52-06 5.0%
43-02 5.0% 45-07 5.8% 48-02 5.9% 52-07 < 4.5%
43-03 7.9% 45-08 na 48-03 5.7% 52-08 < 4.5%
43-04 5.3% 45-09 7.1% 48-04 6.3% 52-09 < 4.5%
43-05 6.0% 45-10 < 4.5% 48-05 5.1% 52-10 < 4.5%
Tables | 61
Table 8 (Cont.): Lumber Moisture Content at Testing (Corrected)
Sample Moisture Sample Moisture Sample Moisture Sample Moisture
Number Content Number Content Number Content Number Content
53-01 5.1% 55-06 < 6.0% 58-01 5.0% 64-06 5.3%
53-02 5.1% 55-07 5.7% 58-02 5.0% 64-07 5.0%
53-03 5.7% 55-08 5.2% 58-03 5.6% 64-08 4.9%
53-04 6.0% 55-09 5.6% 58-04 5.8% 64-09 4.7%
53-05 5.0% 55-10 5.2% 58-05 4.7% 64-10 4.8%
53-06 5.0% 56-01 5.0% 58-06 5.9% 65-01 4.7%
53-07 < 4.5% 56-02 4.9% 58-07 5.6% 65-02 4.7%
53-08 5.3% 56-03 5.0% 58-08 5.9% 65-03 < 4.5%
53-09 5.0% 56-04 4.9% 58-09 5.9% 65-04 5.0%
53-10 4.8% 56-05 4.7% 58-10 6.2% 65-05 < 4.5%
54-01 < 4.5% 56-06 4.9% 63-01 4.7% 65-06 4.8%
54-02 5.1% 56-07 5.0% 63-02 < 4.5% 65-07 4.6%
54-03 < 4.5% 56-08 5.6% 63-03 < 4.5% 65-08 4.7%
54-04 4.8% 56-09 5.9% 63-04 < 4.5% 65-09 5.0%
54-05 5.0% 56-10 5.1% 63-05 5.1% 65-10 < 4.5%
54-06 5.0% 57-01 5.1% 63-06 < 4.5% 66-01 4.8%
54-07 < 4.5% 57-02 5.9% 63-07 < 4.5% 66-02 5.0%
54-08 5.2% 57-03 < 4.5% 63-08 < 4.5% 66-03 5.3%
54-09 4.8% 57-04 4.7% 63-09 < 4.5% 66-04 5.8%
54-10 5.0% 57-05 4.7% 63-10 < 4.5% 66-05 4.7%
55-01 5.4% 57-06 4.9% 64-01 4.7% 66-06 4.8%
55-02 5.5% 57-07 < 4.5% 64-02 5.1% 66-07 5.9%
55-03 5.0% 57-08 5.6% 64-03 4.9% 66-08 5.2%
55-04 5.5% 57-09 5.1% 64-04 4.7% 66-09 4.8%
55-05 6.1% 57-10 5.9% 64-05 4.7% 66-10 4.9%
62 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
Table 8 (Cont.): Lumber Moisture Content at Testing (Corrected)
Sample Moisture Sample Moisture Sample Moisture Sample Moisture
Number Content Number Content Number Content Number Content
67-01 < 6.0% 69-06 4.7% 82-01 5.1% 84-06 8.8%
67-02 < 6.0% 69-07 4.8% 82-02 5.1% 84-07 4.9%
67-03 4.7% 69-08 4.7% 82-03 5.9% 84-08 5.2%
67-04 < 4.5% 69-09 4.8% 82-04 4.7% 84-09 5.3%
67-05 < 4.5% 69-10 5.1% 82-05 4.6% 84-10 5.3%
67-06 < 4.5% 70-01 5.0% 82-06 5.9% 85-01 8.0%
67-07 < 4.5% 70-02 4.8% 82-07 5.0% 85-02 4.9%
67-08 4.7% 70-03 5.1% 82-08 6.1% 85-03 4.6%
67-09 5.6% 70-04 4.8% 82-09 5.8% 85-04 6.2%
67-10 5.0% 70-05 5.0% 82-10 6.2% 85-05 6.2%
68-01 5.4% 70-06 5.7% 83-01 4.9% 85-06 7.7%
68-02 5.2% 70-07 5.3% 83-02 4.8% 85-07 5.9%
68-03 5.5% 70-08 4.7% 83-03 < 4.5% 85-08 5.0%
68-04 4.9% 70-09 4.7% 83-04 4.8% 85-09 5.6%
68-05 < 4.5% 70-10 < 4.5% 83-05 5.4% 85-10 4.8%
68-06 < 4.5% 81-01 6.0% 83-06 < 4.5% 86-01 < 4.5%
68-07 < 4.5% 81-02 < 4.5% 83-07 4.9% 86-02 < 4.5%
68-08 5.9% 81-03 5.3% 83-08 5.2% 86-03 4.8%
68-09 < 4.5% 81-04 5.3% 83-09 < 4.5% 86-04 < 4.5%
68-10 8.9% 81-05 < 4.5% 83-10 5.2% 86-05 < 4.5%
69-01 5.2% 81-06 na 84-01 5.2% 86-06 < 4.5%
69-02 < 4.5% 81-07 5.3% 84-02 8.0% 86-07 4.9%
69-03 5.1% 81-08 < 4.5% 84-03 4.9% 86-08 4.6%
69-04 4.6% 81-09 4.9% 84-04 5.2% 86-09 4.8%
69-05 5.0% 81-10 4.9% 84-05 7.1% 86-10 5.5%
Tables | 63
Table 8 (Cont.): Lumber Moisture Content at Testing (Corrected)
Sample Moisture Sample Moisture Sample Moisture Sample Moisture
Number Content Number Content Number Content Number Content
87-01 5.9% 89-06 5.7% 92-01 5.0% 94-06 6.8%
87-02 < 4.5% 89-07 5.8% 92-02 na 94-07 4.8%
87-03 < 4.5% 89-08 5.8% 92-03 4.7% 94-08 5.0%
87-04 5.4% 89-09 6.8% 92-04 5.9% 94-09 5.0%
87-05 5.0% 89-10 7.4% 92-05 5.0% 94-10 5.2%
87-06 5.2% 90-01 7.1% 92-06 5.4% 95-01 5.9%
87-07 5.2% 90-02 9.2% 92-07 5.0% 95-02 5.3%
87-08 5.9% 90-03 7.0% 92-08 < 4.5% 95-03 4.7%
87-09 < 4.5% 90-04 7.1% 92-09 6.0% 95-04 5.4%
87-10 < 4.5% 90-05 6.8% 92-10 4.8% 95-05 5.3%
88-01 < 4.5% 90-06 7.7% 93-01 4.7% 95-06 5.4%
88-02 < 4.5% 90-07 5.5% 93-02 8.9% 95-07 5.3%
88-03 < 4.5% 90-08 5.9% 93-03 < 4.5% 95-08 4.7%
88-04 5.7% 90-09 5.5% 93-04 5.0% 95-09 6.2%
88-05 5.0% 90-10 < 4.5% 93-05 5.2% 95-10 < 4.5%
88-06 < 4.5% 91-01 5.7% 93-06 6.6% 96-01 4.7%
88-07 4.7% 91-02 5.6% 93-07 5.9% 96-02 5.0%
88-08 5.0% 91-03 < 4.5% 93-08 5.6% 96-03 6.3%
88-09 5.1% 91-04 5.8% 93-09 4.7% 96-04 6.4%
88-10 5.0% 91-05 5.6% 93-10 8.4% 96-05 5.0%
89-01 5.2% 91-06 5.3% 94-01 4.7% 96-06 4.9%
89-02 4.6% 91-07 5.2% 94-02 4.8% 96-07 5.0%
89-03 5.3% 91-08 5.4% 94-03 5.0% 96-08 6.1%
89-04 6.5% 91-09 6.6% 94-04 4.9% 96-09 6.4%
89-05 6.9% 91-10 5.0% 94-05 5.8% 96-10 4.7%
64 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
Table 9: Dimensions of the Fasteners
Fastener Fastener
Type Name Length (in) Diameter (in) Crown (in)
8d Cooler 2 3/8 0.113 -
8d Cooler L1 1 11/16 0.113 -
8d Cooler L2 2 0.113 -
8d Common 2 1/2 0.131 -
8d Common L1 1 13/16 0.131 -
8d Common L2 2 0.131 -
10d Framing 3 0.131 -
10d Common 3 0.148 -
10d Common Short 2 1/8 0.148 -
#8 Rolled-Hardened L1 2 0.164 -
#8 Rolled-Hardened L2 3 0.164 -
#10 Rolled-Hardened 3 0.190 -
Staple 16 Gage 1 3/4 0.063 1/2
Fastener Size
Nail
Wood
Screw
Tables | 65
Table 10: Nail Bending Yield Strength
Sample
Number 8d Cooler 8d Common 10d Framing 10d Common
01 116,328 108,052 122,284 107,725
02 96,961 103,918 118,150 106,649
03 102,341 95,971 121,593 111,910
04 112,025 95,461 113,316 112,507
05 96,961 101,496 111,935 107,579
06 98,037 102,187 118,150 109,995
07 106,645 100,976 116,769 108,204
08 98,037 104,949 125,737 112,271
09 112,025 101,326 118,150 100,639
10 114,177 103,398 117,460 110,599
11 102,341 105,119 121,593 99,827
12 118,465 108,232 125,046 110,238
13 100,189 105,810 116,769 101,139
14 108,797 103,228 125,737 104,852
15 107,721 98,043 125,046 114,902
Average 106,070 102,544 119,849 107,936
Nail Bending Yield Strength (psi)
66 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
Table 11: Wood Screw Bending Yield Strength
Sample
Number #8 Rolled L1 #8 Rolled L2 #10 Rolled
01 108,601 81,932 93,973
02 104,147 116,168 107,856
03 106,122 104,363 106,118
04 108,370 91,847 108,166
05 94,446 123,960 106,438
06 94,691 131,752 95,556
07 89,718 90,669 104,070
08 99,909 84,534 100,439
09 92,702 113,333 92,876
10 91,966 91,847 108,166
11 98,179 91,149 100,128
12 94,691 116,647 95,556
13 104,637 102,241 92,556
14 89,977 86,657 92,090
15 94,201 110,033 105,011
Average 98,157 102,475 100,600
Wood Screw Bending Yield Strength (psi)
Tables | 67
Table 12: Reference Deformations
Fastener Loading Reference
Type Direction Deformation, (in)
Perpendicular
Parallel
Perpendicular
Parallel
Perpendicular
Parallel
Nail
Staple
Wood
Screw
0.17
0.20
0.12
68 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
Table 13: Monotonic Loading Results for Perpendicular Loaded Specimens Assembled with
Nails
a) First Set
b) Second Set
Sample Maximum 80% Max
Number Load (lb) Load (lb) m (in) (in) Comments
01 186 148 0.21 0.13 2x4 Fracture
02 134 107 0.15 0.09
03 183 147 0.25 0.15 Clamp Opened During Test
04 317 253 0.25 0.15
05 259 207 0.53 0.32 Lifting of Front Edge of 2x4
06 213 170 0.24 0.14
07 266 213 0.37 0.22
08 259 207 0.42 0.25
09 191 153 0.29 0.18
10 189 151 0.54 0.33 Lifting of Front Edge of 2x4
11 142 113 0.23 0.14
Average 217 174 0.28 0.17
Sample Maximum 80% Max
Number Load (lb) Load (lb) m (in) (in) Comments
01 301 241 0.45 0.27
02 312 249 0.38 0.23
03 230 184 0.4 0.24
04 207 165 0.26 0.16
Average 262 210 0.37 0.23
Tables | 69
Table 14: Monotonic Loading Results for Parallel Loaded Specimens Assembled with Nails
Sample Maximum 80% Max
Number Load (lb) Load (lb) m (in) (in) Comments
01 233 186 0.42 0.25
02 209 167 0.33 0.20
03 262 210 0.34 0.20
04 183 146 0.34 0.20
05 232 186 0.44 0.27
06 258 206 0.46 0.27
07 223 178 0.38 0.23
Average 229 183 0.39 0.23
70 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
Table 15: Monotonic Loading Results for Perpendicular Loaded Specimens Assembled with
Screws
Sample Maximum 80% Max
Number Load (lb) Load (lb) m (in) (in) Comments
01 266 213 0.22 0.13
02 159 127 0.17 0.10
03 183 146 0.21 0.12
04 290 232 0.25 0.14
Average 225 180 0.21 0.12
Tables | 71
Table 16: Monotonic Loading Results for Perpendicular Loaded Specimens Assembled with
Staples
Sample Maximum 80% Max
Number Load (lb) Load (lb) m (in) (in) Comments
01 232 186 0.51 0.31
02 212 170 0.47 0.28
Average 222 178 0.49 0.30
72 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
Table 17: Property Summary for the Basic Loading History Connection Type
Sample Initial Maximum Slip at Total Absorbed
Number Stiffness (lb/in) Load (lb) Max Load (in) Energy (lb-in)
CTR B1 4647 205 0.17 394
CTR B2 3610 220 0.23 669
CTR B3 4283 224 0.33 908
CTR B4 4534 239 0.22 694
CTR B5 4145 252 0.38 1015
CTR B6 3803 196 0.25 492
CTR B7 3943 244 0.24 661
Average 4138 226 0.26 690
Std Dev 380 21 0.07 217
Tables | 73
Table 18: Property Summary for the Simplified Basic Loading History Connection Type
Sample Initial Maximum Slip at Total Absorbed
Number Stiffness (lb/in) Load (lb) Max Load (in) Energy (lb-in)
CTR S1 3271 194 0.32 795
CTR S2 3253 193 0.16 735
CTR S3 4566 190 0.23 675
CTR S4 2622 126 0.15 261
CTR S5 4402 212 0.23 765
CTR S6 4590 208 0.21 660
Average 3784 187 0.21 648
Std Dev 841 31 0.06 197
74 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
Table 19: Variable and Property Summary for Connection Type No. 03
a) Variables
b) Properties
Sheathing Type 3/8 in OSB
Sheathing Manufacturer Slocan Group
Sheathing Density 38.5 pcf
Wood Member Douglass Fir - Larch
Loading Direction Perpendicular
Fastener Edge Distance 3/8 in
Overdriven Depth None
Fastener Type 8d Cooler Nail (2 3/8 in x 0.113 in)
Bending Yield Strength 106 ksi
Sample Initial Maximum Slip at Max
Number Stiffness (lb/in) Load (lb) Load (in) Assembly Testing
01 2686 161 0.32 35.9% 7.1%
02 3769 179 0.24 35.9% 7.2%
03 2656 182 0.24 27.3% < 6.0%
04 2803 201 0.40 27.3% 6.6%
05 2525 174 0.16 27.3% 6.4%
06 3897 163 0.24 27.3% 6.8%
07 2929 174 0.32 27.3% 6.7%
08 2384 148 0.11 27.3% 7.4%
09 3842 178 0.24 35.9% 8.0%
10 2255 178 0.24 27.3% 6.5%
Average 2975 174 0.25 29.9% 7.0%
Std Dev 625 14 0.08 4.15% 0.51%
Wood Moisture at
Tables | 75
Table 19 (Cont.): Variable and Property Summary for Connection Type No. 03
c) Failure Information
Sample Failure Yield Design Maximum
Number Mode Mode Load (lb) Load (lb)
01 Withdrawal Mode IIIs 54 161
02 Tear Out - Withdrawal Mode IIIs 54 161
03 Withdrawal Mode IIIs 54 161
04 Withdrawal Mode IIIs 54 161
05 Tear Out Mode IIIs 54 161
06 Tear Out Mode IIIs 54 161
07 Withdrawal Mode IIIs 54 161
08 Tear Out Mode IIIs 54 161
09 Tear Out - Withdrawal Mode IIIs 54 161
10 Withdrawal Mode IIIs 54 161
76 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
Table 20: Variable and Property Summary for Connection Type No. 47
a) Variables
b) Properties
Sheathing Type 3/8 in OSB
Sheathing Manufacturer Slocan Group
Sheathing Density 38.5 pcf
Wood Member Douglass Fir - Larch
Loading Direction Perpendicular
Fastener Edge Distance 3/8 in
Overdriven Depth None
Fastener Type 8d Common Nail (2 in x 0.131 in)
Bending Yield Strength 103 ksi
Sample Initial Maximum Slip at Max
Number Stiffness (lb/in) Load (lb) Load (in) Assembly Testing
01 3920 201 0.16 26.8% 6.2%
02 3650 163 0.16 26.6% 7.9%
03 2602 184 0.16 29.3% 7.0%
04 4370 189 0.24 26.8% 6.5%
05 2867 183 0.40 26.8% 6.6%
06 3151 191 0.16 29.3% 7.1%
07 3840 181 0.16 26.6% 7.7%
08 4231 188 0.24 26.8% 6.6%
09 3489 182 0.16 29.3% < 6.0%
10 4575 188 0.24 29.3% 6.3%
Average 3670 185 0.21 27.8% 6.9%
Std Dev 650 10 0.08 1.33% 0.60%
Wood Moisture at
Tables | 77
Table 20 (Cont.): Variable and Property Summary for Connection Type No. 47
c) Failure Information
Sample Mode Yield Design Maximum
Number of Failure Mode Load (lb) Load (lb)
01 Tear Out Mode IIIs 71 207
02 Tear Out Mode IIIs 71 207
03 Tear Out Mode IIIs 71 207
04 Tear Out Mode IIIs 71 207
05 Withdrawal Mode IIIs 71 207
06 Tear Out Mode IIIs 71 207
07 Tear Out Mode IIIs 71 207
08 Tear Out Mode IIIs 71 207
09 Tear Out Mode IIIs 71 207
10 Tear Out Mode IIIs 71 207
This page left intentionally blank.
Figures | 79
FIGURES
80 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
Figure 1: Typical Specimens
Perpendicular
Specimen
Parallel
Specimen
Sheathing
Panel
Sheathing
Panel
Wood
Member
Wood
Member
Fastener
Applied
Load
Applied
Load
Figures | 81
Figure 2: Schematic Representation of the Specimens
Sheathing
Panel
Wood Member
Fastener
Applied
Load
Sheathing
Panel
Wood Member
Fastener
Applied
Load
82 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
Figure 3: Type and Thickness of Sheathing Panels
3/8” OSB
7/16” OSB 15/32” OSB
19/32” OSB
15/32” PLY
Figures | 83
Figure 4: Wood Member
Douglas Fir-Larch
Pressure Treated Hem-Fir
84 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
Figure 5: Fasteners
8d Cooler Nail
(2 3/8” x 0.113”)
8d Cooler Nail L1
(1 11/16” x 0.113”)
8d Cooler Nail L2
(2” x 0.113”)
8d Common Nail
(2 1/2” x 0.131”)
8d Common Nail L1
(1 13/16” x 0.131”)
8d Common Nail L2
(2” x 0.131”)
10d Framing Nail
(3” x 0.131”)
10d Common Nail
(3” x 0.148”)
10d Common Short Nail
(2 1/8” x 0.148”)
#8 Rolled Hardened Screw L1
(2” x 0.164”)
#8 Rolled Hardened Screw L2
(3” x 0.164”)
#10 Rolled Hardened Screw
(3” x 0.190”)
16 gage Staple
(1 3/4”, 1/2”)
Figures | 85
Figure 6: Fastener Edge Distance
3/8”
86 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
Figure 7: Fastener Driven Depths
Underdriven Flush-Driven Overdriven
Sheathing
Panel Wood
Member
Figures | 87
Figure 8: Stamps on Sheathing Panels
3/8” OSB std 7/16” OSB std
15/32” OSB std 19/32” OSB std
88 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
Figure 9: Moisture Box
Figures | 89
Figure 10: Moisture Meter
90 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
Figure 11: Specimens Drying
Figures | 91
Figure 12: Time Required for Specimens to Achieve a Dry Condition
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21
Time (days)
Mo
istu
re C
on
ten
t
01 02 03 04 05 06 07
08 09 10 Avg
14th Day
12% MC
92 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
Figure 13: Testing Apparatus for Determining Bending Yield Strength of Fasteners
Figures | 93
Figure 14: Bending Yield Strength Test in Progress
94 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
Figure 15: Typical Load-Slip Response of a Fastener to the Bending Yield Strength Test
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20
Slip (in)
Lo
ad
(lb
)
0
89
178
267
356
445
534
623
0 1.27 2.54 3.81 5.08
Slip (mm)
Lo
ad
(N
)
Figures | 95
Figure 16: Locations Along a Screw Where the Bending Yield Strength Can Be Determined
Mid-Length Location
Transition Zone
96 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
Figure 17: Specimen Assembly Apparatus
Figures | 97
Figure 18: Punches for Nails
98 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
Figure 19: Punches for Staples
Figures | 99
Figure 20: Testing Apparatus
100 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
Figure 21: Testing Apparatus Parts
a) Clamps to Secure Wood Member
Figures | 101
Figure 21 (Cont.): Testing Apparatus Parts
b) Sliding Backside Away from Specimen c) Sliding Backside in Final Position
d) Top Clamp
102 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
Figure 22: Frictionless Rolling System
Figures | 103
Figure 23: Testing Apparatus Load Cell
104 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
Figure 24: Testing Apparatus String Pots
Figures | 105
Figure 25: Overall Testing Setup
106 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
Figure 26: Simplified Basic Loading History
-400%
-300%
-200%
-100%
0%
100%
200%
300%
400%
0 10 20 30 40 50
Cycles
Per
cen
t of
Del
ta
Figures | 107
Figure 27: Typical Monotonic Load-Slip Response of a Specimen
0
50
100
150
200
250
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35
Slip (in)
Lo
ad
(lb
)
0
222
445
667
890
1112
0.00 1.27 2.54 3.81 5.08 6.35 7.62 8.89
Slip (mm)
Lo
ad
(N
)
Fmax
0.8 Fmax
m
108 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
Figure 28: Typical Perpendicular Specimen with an Offset Fastener
Sheathing
Panel
Wood
Member Fastener
Figures | 109
Figure 29: Typical Perpendicular Specimen with a Center Fastener
Sheathing
Panel Wood
Member Fastener
110 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
Figure 30: Typical Parallel Specimen with a Center Fastener
Sheathing
Panel Wood
Member
Fastener
Fastener
Figures | 111
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Slip (in)
Loa
d (
lb)
-2224
-1779
-1334
-890
-445
0
445
890
1334
1779
2224
-20.32 -15.24 -10.16 -5.08 0 5.08 10.16 15.24 20.32
Slip (mm)
Loa
d (
N)
Figure 31: Load-Slip Response to the Simplified Basic Loading History, Perpendicular, Δ = 0.17 in
a) Offset Specimen No. 1 - Nail
b) Offset Specimen No. 2 – Nail
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Slip (in)
Load
(lb
)
-2224
-1779
-1334
-890
-445
0
445
890
1334
1779
2224
-20.32 -15.24 -10.16 -5.08 0 5.08 10.16 15.24 20.32
Slip (mm)
Load
(N
)
112 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Slip (in)
Load
(lb
)
-2224
-1779
-1334
-890
-445
0
445
890
1334
1779
2224
-20.32 -15.24 -10.16 -5.08 0 5.08 10.16 15.24 20.32
Slip (mm)
Load
(N
)
Figure 31 (Cont.): Load-Slip Response to the Simplified Basic Loading History, Perpendicular, Δ = 0.17 in
c) Offset Specimen No. 3 - Nail
d) Offset Specimen No. 4 - Nail
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Slip (in)
Loa
d (
lb)
-2224
-1779
-1334
-890
-445
0
445
890
1334
1779
2224
-20.32 -15.24 -10.16 -5.08 0 5.08 10.16 15.24 20.32
Slip (mm)
Loa
d (
N)
Figures | 113
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Slip (in)
Load
(lb
)
-2224
-1779
-1334
-890
-445
0
445
890
1334
1779
2224
-20.32 -15.24 -10.16 -5.08 0 5.08 10.16 15.24 20.32
Slip (mm)
Load
(N
)
Figure 31 (Cont.): Load-Slip Response to the Simplified Basic Loading History, Perpendicular, Δ = 0.17 in
e) Offset Specimen No. 5 - Nail
f) Offset Specimen No. 6 - Nail
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Slip (in)
Load
(lb
)
-2224
-1779
-1334
-890
-445
0
445
890
1334
1779
2224
-20.32 -15.24 -10.16 -5.08 0 5.08 10.16 15.24 20.32
Slip (mm)
Load
(N
)
114 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Slip (in)
Loa
d (
lb)
-2224
-1779
-1334
-890
-445
0
445
890
1334
1779
2224
-20.32 -15.24 -10.16 -5.08 0 5.08 10.16 15.24 20.32
Slip (mm)
Loa
d (
N)
Figure 32: Load-Slip Response to the Simplified Basic Loading History, Perpendicular, Δ = 0.20 in
a) Specimen No. 1 - Nail
b) Specimen No. 2 - Nail
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Slip (in)
Loa
d (
lb)
-2224
-1779
-1334
-890
-445
0
445
890
1334
1779
2224
-20.32 -15.24 -10.16 -5.08 0 5.08 10.16 15.24 20.32
Slip (mm)
Loa
d (
N)
Figures | 115
Figure 32 (Cont.): Load-Slip Response to the Simplified Basic Loading History, Perpendicular, Δ = 0.20 in
c) Specimen No. 3 - Nail
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Slip (in)
Lo
ad
(lb
)
-2224
-1779
-1334
-890
-445
0
445
890
1334
1779
2224
-20.32 -15.24 -10.16 -5.08 0 5.08 10.16 15.24 20.32
Slip (mm)
Lo
ad
(N
)
116 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Slip (in)
Loa
d (
lb)
-2224
-1779
-1334
-890
-445
0
445
890
1334
1779
2224
-20.32 -15.24 -10.16 -5.08 0 5.08 10.16 15.24 20.32
Slip (mm)
Loa
d (
N)
Figure 33: Load-Slip Response to the Simplified Basic Loading History, Parallel, Δ = 0.17 in
a) Specimen No. 1 - Nail
b) Specimen No. 2 - Nail
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Slip (in)
Load
(lb
)
-2224
-1779
-1334
-890
-445
0
445
890
1334
1779
2224
-20.32 -15.24 -10.16 -5.08 0 5.08 10.16 15.24 20.32
Slip (mm)
Load
(N
)
Figures | 117
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Slip (in)
Loa
d (
lb)
-2224
-1779
-1334
-890
-445
0
445
890
1334
1779
2224
-20.32 -15.24 -10.16 -5.08 0 5.08 10.16 15.24 20.32
Slip (mm)
Loa
d (
N)
Figure 33 (Cont.): Load-Slip Response to the Simplified Basic Loading History, Parallel, Δ = 0.17 in
c) Specimen No. 3 - Nail
d) Specimen No. 4 - Nail
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Slip (in)
Loa
d (
lb)
-2224
-1779
-1334
-890
-445
0
445
890
1334
1779
2224
-20.32 -15.24 -10.16 -5.08 0 5.08 10.16 15.24 20.32
Slip (mm)
Loa
d (
N)
118 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Slip (in)
Loa
d (
lb)
-2224
-1779
-1334
-890
-445
0
445
890
1334
1779
2224
-20.32 -15.24 -10.16 -5.08 0 5.08 10.16 15.24 20.32
Slip (mm)
Loa
d (
N)
Figure 33 (Cont.): Load-Slip Response to the Simplified Basic Loading History, Parallel, Δ = 0.17 in
e) Specimen No. 5 - Nail
f) Specimen No. 6 - Nail
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Slip (in)
Loa
d (
lb)
-2224
-1779
-1334
-890
-445
0
445
890
1334
1779
2224
-20.32 -15.24 -10.16 -5.08 0 5.08 10.16 15.24 20.32
Slip (mm)
Loa
d (
N)
Figures | 119
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Slip (in)
Loa
d (
lb)
-2224
-1779
-1334
-890
-445
0
445
890
1334
1779
2224
-20.32 -15.24 -10.16 -5.08 0 5.08 10.16 15.24 20.32
Slip (mm)
Loa
d (
N)
Figure 34: Load-Slip Response to the Simplified Basic Loading History, Parallel, Δ = 0.20 in
a) Specimen No. 1 - Nail
b) Specimen No. 2 - Nail
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Slip (in)
Loa
d (
lb)
-2224
-1779
-1334
-890
-445
0
445
890
1334
1779
2224
-20.32 -15.24 -10.16 -5.08 0 5.08 10.16 15.24 20.32
Slip (mm)
Loa
d (
N)
120 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Slip (in)
Load
(lb
)
-2224
-1779
-1334
-890
-445
0
445
890
1334
1779
2224
-20.32 -15.24 -10.16 -5.08 0 5.08 10.16 15.24 20.32
Slip (mm)
Load
(N
)
Figure 34 (Cont.): Load-Slip Response to the Simplified Basic Loading History, Parallel, Δ = 0.20 in
c) Specimen No. 3 - Nail
d) Specimen No. 4 - Nail
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Slip (in)
Load
(lb
)
-2224
-1779
-1334
-890
-445
0
445
890
1334
1779
2224
-20.32 -15.24 -10.16 -5.08 0 5.08 10.16 15.24 20.32
Slip (mm)
Load
(N
)
Figures | 121
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Slip (in)
Lo
ad
(lb
)
-2224
-1779
-1334
-890
-445
0
445
890
1334
1779
2224
-20.32 -15.24 -10.16 -5.08 0 5.08 10.16 15.24 20.32
Slip (mm)
Lo
ad
(N
)
Figure 35: Load-Slip Response to the Simplified Basic Loading History, Perpendicular, Δ = 0.12 in
a) Specimen No. 1 - Screw
b) Specimen No. 2 - Screw
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Slip (in)
Lo
ad
(lb
)
-2224
-1779
-1334
-890
-445
0
445
890
1334
1779
2224
-20.32 -15.24 -10.16 -5.08 0 5.08 10.16 15.24 20.32
Slip (mm)
Lo
ad
(N
)
122 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
Figure 35 (Cont.): Load-Slip Response to the Simplified Basic Loading History, Perpendicular, Δ = 0.12 in
c) Specimen No. 3 - Screw
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Slip (in)
Lo
ad
(lb
)
-2224
-1779
-1334
-890
-445
0
445
890
1334
1779
2224
-20.32 -15.24 -10.16 -5.08 0 5.08 10.16 15.24 20.32
Slip (mm)
Lo
ad
(N
)
Figures | 123
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Slip (in)
Lo
ad
(lb
)
-2224
-1779
-1334
-890
-445
0
445
890
1334
1779
2224
-20.32 -15.24 -10.16 -5.08 0 5.08 10.16 15.24 20.32
Slip (mm)
Lo
ad
(N
)
Figure 36: Load-Slip Response to the Simplified Basic Loading History, Perpendicular, Δ = 0.17 in
a) Specimen No. 1 - Screw
b) Specimen No. 2 - Screw
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Slip (in)
Lo
ad
(lb
)
-2224
-1779
-1334
-890
-445
0
445
890
1334
1779
2224
-20.32 -15.24 -10.16 -5.08 0 5.08 10.16 15.24 20.32
Slip (mm)
Lo
ad
(N
)
124 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
Figure 37: Load-Slip Response to the Simplified Basic Loading History, Specimen with Staple,
Perpendicular, Δ = 0.17 in
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Slip (in)
Lo
ad
(lb
)
-2224
-1779
-1334
-890
-445
0
445
890
1334
1779
2224
-20.32 -15.24 -10.16 -5.08 0 5.08 10.16 15.24 20.32
Slip (mm)
Lo
ad
(N
)
Figures | 125
Figure 38: Load-Slip Response to the Simplified Basic Loading History, Specimen with Staple,
Perpendicular, Δ = 0.20 in
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Slip (in)
Lo
ad
(lb
)
-2224
-1779
-1334
-890
-445
0
445
890
1334
1779
2224
-20.32 -15.24 -10.16 -5.08 0 5.08 10.16 15.24 20.32
Slip (mm)
Lo
ad
(N
)
126 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
Figure 39: Load-Slip Response to the Simplified Basic Loading History, Specimen with Staple,
Parallel, Δ = 0.17 in
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Slip (in)
Lo
ad
(lb
)
-2224
-1779
-1334
-890
-445
0
445
890
1334
1779
2224
-20.32 -15.24 -10.16 -5.08 0 5.08 10.16 15.24 20.32
Slip (mm)
Lo
ad
(N
)
Figures | 127
1.73 2.59
12.95
17.27
21.59
3.456.05
25.91
30.23
8.64
0.860.650.43
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12
Displacement Level
Rate
(m
m/s
ec)
Figure 40: Loading Rate Corresponding to Loading Frequency
a) For Δ = 0.12 in
b) For Δ = 0.17 in
1.83 2.44
12.19
18.29
21.34
1.22
15.24
9.14
6.10
0.610.460.30
4.27
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12
Displacement Level
Rate
(m
m/s
ec)
128 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
Figure 40 (Cont.): Loading Rate Corresponding to Loading Frequency
c) For Δ = 0.20 in
2.03 3.05
7.11
1.020.760.51
4.06
35.56
30.48
25.40
20.32
15.24
10.16
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12
Displacement Level
Rate
(m
m/s
ec)
Figures | 129
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Slip (in)
Load
(lb
)
-2224
-1779
-1334
-890
-445
0
445
890
1334
1779
2224
-20.32 -15.24 -10.16 -5.08 0 5.08 10.16 15.24 20.32
Slip (mm)
Load
(N
)
Figure 41: Load-Slip Response to the Basic Loading History, Perpendicular, Δ = 0.17 in
a) Specimen No. 1 - Nail
b) Specimen No. 2 - Nail
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Slip (in)
Loa
d (
lb)
-2224
-1779
-1334
-890
-445
0
445
890
1334
1779
2224
-20.32 -15.24 -10.16 -5.08 0 5.08 10.16 15.24 20.32
Slip (mm)
Loa
d (
N)
130 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Slip (in)
Loa
d (
lb)
-2224
-1779
-1334
-890
-445
0
445
890
1334
1779
2224
-20.32 -15.24 -10.16 -5.08 0 5.08 10.16 15.24 20.32
Slip (mm)
Loa
d (
N)
Figure 41 (Cont.): Load-Slip Response to the Basic Loading History, Perpendicular, Δ = 0.17 in
c) Specimen No. 3 - Nail
d) Specimen No. 4 - Nail
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Slip (in)
Load
(lb
)
-2224
-1779
-1334
-890
-445
0
445
890
1334
1779
2224
-20.32 -15.24 -10.16 -5.08 0 5.08 10.16 15.24 20.32
Slip (mm)
Load
(N
)
Figures | 131
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Slip (in)
Loa
d (
lb)
-2224
-1779
-1334
-890
-445
0
445
890
1334
1779
2224
-20.32 -15.24 -10.16 -5.08 0 5.08 10.16 15.24 20.32
Slip (mm)
Loa
d (
N)
Figure 41 (Cont.): Load-Slip Response to the Basic Loading History, Perpendicular, Δ = 0.17 in
e) Specimen No. 5 - Nail
f) Specimen No. 6 - Nail
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Slip (in)
Loa
d (
lb)
-2224
-1779
-1334
-890
-445
0
445
890
1334
1779
2224
-20.32 -15.24 -10.16 -5.08 0 5.08 10.16 15.24 20.32
Slip (mm)
Loa
d (
N)
132 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
Figure 41 (Cont.): Load-Slip Response to the Basic Loading History, Perpendicular, Δ = 0.17 in
g) Specimen No. 7 - Nail
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Slip (in)
Loa
d (
lb)
-2224
-1779
-1334
-890
-445
0
445
890
1334
1779
2224
-20.32 -15.24 -10.16 -5.08 0 5.08 10.16 15.24 20.32
Slip (mm)
Loa
d (
N)
Figures | 133
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Slip (in)
Load
(lb
)
-2224
-1779
-1334
-890
-445
0
445
890
1334
1779
2224
-20.32 -15.24 -10.16 -5.08 0 5.08 10.16 15.24 20.32
Slip (mm)
Load
(N
)
Figure 42: Load-Slip Response to the Simplified Basic Loading History, Perpendicular, Δ = 0.17 in
a) Specimen No. 1 - Nail
b) Specimen No. 2 - Nail
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Slip (in)
Load
(lb
)
-2224
-1779
-1334
-890
-445
0
445
890
1334
1779
2224
-20.32 -15.24 -10.16 -5.08 0 5.08 10.16 15.24 20.32
Slip (mm)
Load
(N
)
134 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Slip (in)
Loa
d (
lb)
-2224
-1779
-1334
-890
-445
0
445
890
1334
1779
2224
-20.32 -15.24 -10.16 -5.08 0 5.08 10.16 15.24 20.32
Slip (mm)
Loa
d (
N)
Figure 42 (Cont.): Load-Slip Response to the Simplified Basic Loading History, Perpendicular, Δ = 0.17 in
c) Specimen No. 3 - Nail
d) Specimen No. 4 - Nail
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Slip (in)
Load
(lb
)
-2224
-1779
-1334
-890
-445
0
445
890
1334
1779
2224
-20.32 -15.24 -10.16 -5.08 0 5.08 10.16 15.24 20.32
Slip (mm)
Load
(N
)
Figures | 135
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Slip (in)
Loa
d (
lb)
-2224
-1779
-1334
-890
-445
0
445
890
1334
1779
2224
-20.32 -15.24 -10.16 -5.08 0 5.08 10.16 15.24 20.32
Slip (mm)
Loa
d (
N)
Figure 42 (Cont.): Load-Slip Response to the Simplified Basic Loading History, Perpendicular, Δ = 0.17 in
e) Specimen No. 5 - Nail
f) Specimen No. 6 - Nail
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Slip (in)
Loa
d (
lb)
-2224
-1779
-1334
-890
-445
0
445
890
1334
1779
2224
-20.32 -15.24 -10.16 -5.08 0 5.08 10.16 15.24 20.32
Slip (mm)
Loa
d (
N)
136 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
Rollers
Rubbing
Figure 43: Rolling System and Sources of Friction
Figures | 137
Figure 44: Testing Apparatus Setup for Friction Study
a) No Specimen
b) With Sheathing Panel Only
138 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
Figure 44 (Cont.): Testing Apparatus Setup for Friction Study
c) With a Specimen
Figures | 139
-2
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Slip (in)
Load
(lb
)
-8.90
-6.67
-4.45
-2.22
0.00
2.22
4.45
6.67
8.90
-20.32 -15.24 -10.16 -5.08 0 5.08 10.16 15.24 20.32
Slip (mm)
Load
(N
)
Figure 45: Load-Slip Response to the Simplified Basic Loading History, Perpendicular, Δ = 0.17 in
a) Specimen No. 1
b) Specimen No. 2
-2
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Slip (in)
Loa
d (
lb)
-8.90
-6.67
-4.45
-2.22
0.00
2.22
4.45
6.67
8.90
-20.32 -15.24 -10.16 -5.08 0 5.08 10.16 15.24 20.32
Slip (mm)
Loa
d (
N)
140 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Slip (in)
Load
(lb
)
-2224
-1779
-1334
-890
-445
0
445
890
1334
1779
2224
-20.32 -15.24 -10.16 -5.08 0 5.08 10.16 15.24 20.32
Slip (mm)
Load
(N
)
Figure 46: Load-Slip Response for Connection Type No. 03
a) Specimen No. 1
b) Specimen No. 2
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Slip (in)
Load
(lb
)
-2224
-1779
-1334
-890
-445
0
445
890
1334
1779
2224
-20.32 -15.24 -10.16 -5.08 0 5.08 10.16 15.24 20.32
Slip (mm)
Load
(N
)
Figures | 141
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Slip (in)
Lo
ad
(lb
)
-2224
-1779
-1334
-890
-445
0
445
890
1334
1779
2224
-20.32 -15.24 -10.16 -5.08 0 5.08 10.16 15.24 20.32
Slip (mm)
Lo
ad
(N
)
Figure 46 (Cont.): Load-Slip Response for Connection Type No. 03
c) Specimen No. 3
d) Specimen No. 4
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Slip (in)
Load
(lb
)
-2224
-1779
-1334
-890
-445
0
445
890
1334
1779
2224
-20.32 -15.24 -10.16 -5.08 0 5.08 10.16 15.24 20.32
Slip (mm)
Load
(N
)
142 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Slip (in)
Lo
ad
(lb
)
-2224
-1779
-1334
-890
-445
0
445
890
1334
1779
2224
-20.32 -15.24 -10.16 -5.08 0 5.08 10.16 15.24 20.32
Slip (mm)
Lo
ad
(N
)
Figure 46 (Cont.): Load-Slip Response for Connection Type No. 03
e) Specimen No. 5
f) Specimen No. 6
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Slip (in)
Load
(lb
)
-2224
-1779
-1334
-890
-445
0
445
890
1334
1779
2224
-20.32 -15.24 -10.16 -5.08 0 5.08 10.16 15.24 20.32
Slip (mm)
Load
(N
)
Figures | 143
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Slip (in)
Lo
ad
(lb
)
-2224
-1779
-1334
-890
-445
0
445
890
1334
1779
2224
-20.32 -15.24 -10.16 -5.08 0 5.08 10.16 15.24 20.32
Slip (mm)
Lo
ad
(N
)
Figure 46 (Cont.): Load-Slip Response for Connection Type No. 03
g) Specimen No. 7
h) Specimen No. 8
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Slip (in)
Load
(lb
)
-2224
-1779
-1334
-890
-445
0
445
890
1334
1779
2224
-20.32 -15.24 -10.16 -5.08 0 5.08 10.16 15.24 20.32
Slip (mm)
Load
(N
)
144 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Slip (in)
Lo
ad
(lb
)
-2224
-1779
-1334
-890
-445
0
445
890
1334
1779
2224
-20.32 -15.24 -10.16 -5.08 0 5.08 10.16 15.24 20.32
Slip (mm)
Lo
ad
(N
)
Figure 46 (Cont.): Load-Slip Response for Connection Type No. 03
i) Specimen No. 9
j) Specimen No. 10
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Slip (in)
Load
(lb
)
-2224
-1779
-1334
-890
-445
0
445
890
1334
1779
2224
-20.32 -15.24 -10.16 -5.08 0 5.08 10.16 15.24 20.32
Slip (mm)
Load
(N
)
Figures | 145
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Slip (in)
Lo
ad
(lb
)
-2224
-1779
-1334
-890
-445
0
445
890
1334
1779
2224
-20.32 -15.24 -10.16 -5.08 0 5.08 10.16 15.24 20.32
Slip (mm)
Lo
ad
(N
)
Figure 47: Load-Slip Response for Connection Type No. 47
a) Specimen No. 1
b) Specimen No. 2
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Slip (in)
Load
(lb
)
-2224
-1779
-1334
-890
-445
0
445
890
1334
1779
2224
-20.32 -15.24 -10.16 -5.08 0 5.08 10.16 15.24 20.32
Slip (mm)
Load
(N
)
146 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Slip (in)
Lo
ad
(lb
)
-2224
-1779
-1334
-890
-445
0
445
890
1334
1779
2224
-20.32 -15.24 -10.16 -5.08 0 5.08 10.16 15.24 20.32
Slip (mm)
Lo
ad
(N
)
Figure 47 (Cont.): Load-Slip Response for Connection Type No. 47
c) Specimen No. 3
d) Specimen No. 4
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Slip (in)
Load
(lb
)
-2224
-1779
-1334
-890
-445
0
445
890
1334
1779
2224
-20.32 -15.24 -10.16 -5.08 0 5.08 10.16 15.24 20.32
Slip (mm)
Load
(N
)
Figures | 147
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Slip (in)
Lo
ad
(lb
)
-2224
-1779
-1334
-890
-445
0
445
890
1334
1779
2224
-20.32 -15.24 -10.16 -5.08 0 5.08 10.16 15.24 20.32
Slip (mm)
Lo
ad
(N
)
x
Figure 47 (Cont.): Load-Slip Response for Connection Type No. 47
e) Specimen No. 5
f) Specimen No. 6
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Slip (in)
Load
(lb
)
-2224
-1779
-1334
-890
-445
0
445
890
1334
1779
2224
-20.32 -15.24 -10.16 -5.08 0 5.08 10.16 15.24 20.32
Slip (mm)
Load
(N
)
148 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Slip (in)
Lo
ad
(lb
)
-2224
-1779
-1334
-890
-445
0
445
890
1334
1779
2224
-20.32 -15.24 -10.16 -5.08 0 5.08 10.16 15.24 20.32
Slip (mm)
Lo
ad
(N
)
Figure 47 (Cont.): Load-Slip Response for Connection Type No. 47
g) Specimen No. 7
h) Specimen No. 8
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Slip (in)
Load
(lb
)
-2224
-1779
-1334
-890
-445
0
445
890
1334
1779
2224
-20.32 -15.24 -10.16 -5.08 0 5.08 10.16 15.24 20.32
Slip (mm)
Load
(N
)
Figures | 149
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Slip (in)
Lo
ad
(lb
)
-2224
-1779
-1334
-890
-445
0
445
890
1334
1779
2224
-20.32 -15.24 -10.16 -5.08 0 5.08 10.16 15.24 20.32
Slip (mm)
Lo
ad
(N
)
Figure 47 (Cont.): Load-Slip Response for Connection Type No. 47
i) Specimen No. 9
j) Specimen No. 10
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Slip (in)
Load
(lb
)
-2224
-1779
-1334
-890
-445
0
445
890
1334
1779
2224
-20.32 -15.24 -10.16 -5.08 0 5.08 10.16 15.24 20.32
Slip (mm)
Load
(N
)
150 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
Figure 48: Average Results for Connections Type No. 03 and 47
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
4500
5000
Type No. 03 Type No. 47
Init
ial S
tiff
nes
s (l
b/in
)
0
50
100
150
200
250
Type No. 03 Type No. 47M
ax
imu
m L
oa
d (
lb)
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25
0.30
0.35
Type No. 03 Type No. 47
Dis
pla
cem
ent
at
Ma
x L
oa
d (
in)
Figures | 151
Figure 49: Parameters for Modeling Load-Slip Curves
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
-0.5 -0.375 -0.25 -0.125 0 0.125 0.25 0.375 0.5Slip
Loa
d
K0 r1K0
F1
r2K0
r3K0
r4K0
FI
(u,Fu)
152 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
Figure 50: Range Used for Extraction of Initial Stiffness Parameter
Figures | 153
Figure 51: Range Used for Extraction of Parameter r1 And F1
154 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
Figure 52: Range Used for Extraction of Parameter r2
Figures | 155
Figure 53: Range Used for Extraction of Parameter r3
156 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
Figure 54: Range Used for Extraction of Parameter r4 And FI
Figures | 157
Figure 55: Sensitivity of a Load-Slip Curve to the Stiffness Degradation Parameter
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40
Slip (in)
Lo
ad
(lb
)
0
89
178
267
356
445
534
623
712
801
890
0.00 1.27 2.54 3.81 5.08 6.35 7.62 8.89 10.16 11.43
Slip (mm)
Lo
ad
(N
)
Real
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
158 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
Figure 56: The Measured and the Calculated Load-Slip Curve for a Nail Specimen
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Slip (in)
Load
(lb
)
-2224
-1779
-1334
-890
-445
0
445
890
1334
1779
2224
-20.32 -15.24 -10.16 -5.08 0 5.08 10.16 15.24 20.32
Slip (mm)
Lo
ad
(N
)
Measured Data
Calculated Data
Figures | 159
Figure 57: The Measured and the Calculated Load-Slip Curve for a Wood Screw Specimen
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Slip (in)
Lo
ad
(lb
)
-2224
-1779
-1334
-890
-445
0
445
890
1334
1779
2224
-20.32 -15.24 -10.16 -5.08 0 5.08 10.16 15.24 20.32
Slip (mm)
Lo
ad
(N
)
Measured Data
Calculated Data
160 | Nail, Wood Screw, and Staple Fastener Connections
Figure 58: The Measured and the Calculated Load-Slip Curve for a Staple Specimen
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Slip (in)
Lo
ad
(lb
)
-2224
-1779
-1334
-890
-445
0
445
890
1334
1779
2224
-20.32 -15.24 -10.16 -5.08 0 5.08 10.16 15.24 20.32
Slip (mm)
Lo
ad
(N
)
Measured Data
Calculated Data
Figures | 161
Figure 59: The Measured and the Average Calculated Load-Slip Curve for a Nail Specimen
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Slip (in)
Load
(lb
)
-2224
-1779
-1334
-890
-445
0
445
890
1334
1779
2224
-20.32 -15.24 -10.16 -5.08 0 5.08 10.16 15.24 20.32
Slip (mm)
Lo
ad
(N
)
Measured Data
Calculated Data