{"id":{"repo_id":"vt","oai_identifier":"oai:vtechworks.lib.vt.edu:10919/31772"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/vt/oai:vtechworks.lib.vt.edu:10919/31772","repository":{"repo_id":"vt","name":"Virginia Tech","base_url":"https://vtechworks.lib.vt.edu/oai/request"},"display":{"title":"Comparison of Shear Modulus Test Methods","abstract":"This research compared the results of three tests: ASTM D 198 torsion, ASTM D 198 three-point bending and the five-point bending test (FPBT) using machine-stress-rated (MSR) lumber and laminated veneer lumber (LVL) to determine if the shear properties evaluated by the different test methods were equivalent. Measured E:G ratios were also compared to the E:G ratio of 16:1 commonly assumed for structural wooden members. The average shear moduli results showed significant differences between the three test methods. For both material types, the shear moduli results determined from the two standard test methods (ASTM D 198 three-point bending and torsion), both of which are presently assumed to be equivalent, were significantly different. Most average E:G ratios from the two material types and three test methods showed differences from the E:G ratio of 16:1 commonly assumed for structural wooden members. The average moduli of elasticity results for both material types were not significantly different. Therefore, the lack of significant difference between moduli of elasticity terms indicates that differences between E:G ratios are due to the shear modulus terms. This research has shown differences in shear moduli results of the three test types (ASTM D 198 torsion, ASTM D 198 three-point bending, and the FPBT). Differences in the average E:G ratios per material and test type were also observed.","abstract_html":"This research compared the results of three tests: ASTM D 198 torsion, ASTM D 198 three-point bending and the five-point bending test (FPBT) using machine-stress-rated (MSR) lumber and laminated veneer lumber (LVL) to determine if the shear properties evaluated by the different test methods were equivalent. Measured E:G ratios were also compared to the E:G ratio of 16:1 commonly assumed for structural wooden members. The average shear moduli results showed significant differences between the three test methods. For both material types, the shear moduli results determined from the two standard test methods (ASTM D 198 three-point bending and torsion), both of which are presently assumed to be equivalent, were significantly different. Most average E:G ratios from the two material types and three test methods showed differences from the E:G ratio of 16:1 commonly assumed for structural wooden members. The average moduli of elasticity results for both material types were not significantly different. Therefore, the lack of significant difference between moduli of elasticity terms indicates that differences between E:G ratios are due to the shear modulus terms. This research has shown differences in shear moduli results of the three test types (ASTM D 198 torsion, ASTM D 198 three-point bending, and the FPBT). Differences in the average E:G ratios per material and test type were also observed.","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Harrison, S. Kate"],"institution":"Virginia Tech","degree_name":"Master of Science","degree_level":"masters","degree_discipline":"Wood Science and Forest Products","degree_department":"Wood Science and Forest Products","school":null,"contributors":[],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":["Hindman, Daniel P."],"committee_members":["Thangjitham, Surot","Loferski, Joseph R."],"year":2006,"date_issued":"2006-03-31","date_published":"2006-03-31","updated_at":"2026-07-22T22:18:53Z","subjects":["laminated veneer lumber","machine-stress-rated lumber","shear modulus","test methods"],"languages":[],"rights":["In Copyright"],"rights_urls":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"identifier_entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier.other","label":"Dc Identifier Other","values":["etd-04192006-144343"],"render_values":[{"text":"etd-04192006-144343","href":null,"code":true}]}]},"links":{"outbound_url":"http://hdl.handle.net/10919/31772","outbound_label":"Handle","outbound_source":"dc:identifier.uri"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor.committeechair","label":"Committee Chair","values":["Hindman, Daniel P."]},{"key":"dc:contributor.committeemember","label":"Committee Member","values":["Thangjitham, Surot","Loferski, Joseph R."]},{"key":"dc:contributor.department","label":"Department","values":["Wood Science and Forest Products"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Harrison, S. Kate"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date.accessioned","label":"Dc Date Accessioned","values":["2014-03-14T20:33:53Z"]},{"key":"dc:date.available","label":"Dc Date Available","values":["2014-03-14T20:33:53Z","2006-06-26"]},{"key":"dc:date.issued","label":"Date","values":["2006-03-31"]},{"key":"dc:publisher","label":"Institution","values":["Virginia Tech"]},{"key":"dc:type","label":"Dc Type","values":["Thesis"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_discipline","label":"Discipline","values":["Wood Science and Forest Products"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["masters"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["Master of Science"]},{"key":"thesis:institution_name","label":"Thesis Institution Name","values":["Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["laminated veneer lumber","machine-stress-rated lumber","shear modulus","test methods"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:rights","label":"Dc Rights","values":["In Copyright"]},{"key":"dc:rights.uri","label":"Rights URI","values":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier.other","label":"Dc Identifier Other","values":["etd-04192006-144343"]},{"key":"dc:identifier.uri","label":"Identifier URI","values":["http://hdl.handle.net/10919/31772"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["This research compared the results of three tests: ASTM D 198 torsion, ASTM D 198 three-point bending and the five-point bending test (FPBT) using machine-stress-rated (MSR) lumber and laminated veneer lumber (LVL) to determine if the shear properties evaluated by the different test methods were equivalent. Measured E:G ratios were also compared to the E:G ratio of 16:1 commonly assumed for structural wooden members. The average shear moduli results showed significant differences between the three test methods. For both material types, the shear moduli results determined from the two standard test methods (ASTM D 198 three-point bending and torsion), both of which are presently assumed to be equivalent, were significantly different. Most average E:G ratios from the two material types and three test methods showed differences from the E:G ratio of 16:1 commonly assumed for structural wooden members. The average moduli of elasticity results for both material types were not significantly different. Therefore, the lack of significant difference between moduli of elasticity terms indicates that differences between E:G ratios are due to the shear modulus terms. This research has shown differences in shear moduli results of the three test types (ASTM D 198 torsion, ASTM D 198 three-point bending, and the FPBT). Differences in the average E:G ratios per material and test type were also observed."]},{"key":"dc:description.degree","label":"Dc Description Degree","values":["Master of Science"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["Comparison of Shear Modulus Test Methods"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor.committeechair":["Hindman, Daniel P."],"dc:contributor.committeemember":["Thangjitham, Surot","Loferski, Joseph R."],"dc:contributor.department":["Wood Science and Forest Products"],"dc:creator":["Harrison, S. Kate"],"dc:date.accessioned":["2014-03-14T20:33:53Z"],"dc:date.available":["2014-03-14T20:33:53Z","2006-06-26"],"dc:date.issued":["2006-03-31"],"dc:description.abstract":["This research compared the results of three tests: ASTM D 198 torsion, ASTM D 198 three-point bending and the five-point bending test (FPBT) using machine-stress-rated (MSR) lumber and laminated veneer lumber (LVL) to determine if the shear properties evaluated by the different test methods were equivalent. Measured E:G ratios were also compared to the E:G ratio of 16:1 commonly assumed for structural wooden members. The average shear moduli results showed significant differences between the three test methods. For both material types, the shear moduli results determined from the two standard test methods (ASTM D 198 three-point bending and torsion), both of which are presently assumed to be equivalent, were significantly different. Most average E:G ratios from the two material types and three test methods showed differences from the E:G ratio of 16:1 commonly assumed for structural wooden members. The average moduli of elasticity results for both material types were not significantly different. Therefore, the lack of significant difference between moduli of elasticity terms indicates that differences between E:G ratios are due to the shear modulus terms. This research has shown differences in shear moduli results of the three test types (ASTM D 198 torsion, ASTM D 198 three-point bending, and the FPBT). Differences in the average E:G ratios per material and test type were also observed."],"dc:description.degree":["Master of Science"],"dc:identifier.other":["etd-04192006-144343"],"dc:identifier.uri":["http://hdl.handle.net/10919/31772"],"dc:publisher":["Virginia Tech"],"dc:rights":["In Copyright"],"dc:rights.uri":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dc:subject":["laminated veneer lumber","machine-stress-rated lumber","shear modulus","test methods"],"dc:title":["Comparison of Shear Modulus Test Methods"],"dc:type":["Thesis"],"thesis:degree_discipline":["Wood Science and Forest Products"],"thesis:degree_level":["masters"],"thesis:degree_name":["Master of Science"],"thesis:institution_name":["Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-22T22:18:53Z"}