Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

RE: Approved end-jointed lumber

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Using blocking at the finger joint(s) seems very excessive, as these
studs often have three or four finger joints per 8 ft stud.  From what I
have heard/researched these studs are actually better than non-jointed
studs, as the wood is defect free (that is why they are cut and glued).
Also the glued joints are stronger than the wood. It is basically the
same thing they use for joints in lumber in glue-laminated wood beams.

I have only been asked to substitute the finger-jointed studs on a
couple of jobs.  At first I was skeptical. However, once I checked them
out though they seemed like a great product.  The only thing to be ware
of is that some are "axial load only" rated.  They should not be used in
bending situations, such as beams and headers, but they ARE ACCEPTABLE
to use for exterior studs that see short term wind load bending.  The
reason is that the glues are not good for long term creep (as you would
have with flexural tension in a beam), but are OK for short term
flexural loads.


Charles F. Espenlaub, III, P.E.
Martin-Espenlaub Engineering



-----Original Message-----
From: Bart Needham [mailto:bartn(--nospam--at)ckcps.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2000 12:02 PM
To: 'seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org'
Subject: RE: Approved end-jointed lumber


I have specified these for interior wall framing but not exterior.  I
have
also specified using blocking at the location of the joint.  I haven't
had
any problems using them so far, but I would only use them in non-bending
loading conditions.

Bart Needham

-----Original Message-----
From: Brian K. Smith [mailto:smithegr(--nospam--at)bellsouth.net]
Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2000 8:18 AM
To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
Subject: RE: Approved end-jointed lumber


I have been skeptical about their use; however, I received a "wood"
magazine
sometime last week that discussed their use.  I still don't know if I
would
allow them on one of my projects.  If you want to spec them, you need to
be
aware that there are two different types.  One is designed as a direct
replacement for solid sawn members whereas the other is "axial load
only."

Brian K. Smith, P.E.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dave Adams [mailto:davea(--nospam--at)laneengineers.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2000 1:17 PM
> To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
> Subject: Approved end-jointed lumber
>
>
> Hello all,
>
> U.B.C. Section 2304.2 indicates that "approved end-jointed lumber may
be
> used interchangeably with solid-sawn members..." and I was curious as
to
> your opinions on these when used in shear walls. I have a copy of
> an article
> from ASCE's "Practice Periodical on Structural Design &
> Construction" (Feb.
> 1997), which concluded that there isn't a whole lot of difference in
> strength & stiffness between "solid-sawn" & "end-jointed" lumber used
for
> shear walls (using non-cyclic testing methods). I've also
> obtained some good
> information from WWPA, USDA and others.
>
> "Approved" members appear to be pretty good, but I wanted to
> query the list
> to see if there may be even more information available on these
> members, as
> well as opinions based on experience.
>
> Thanks in advance,
> Dave K. Adams, S.E.
> Lane Engineers, Inc.
>
>