Adoption of Engineered 

Wood Products in Alaska

Joseph A. Roos, Indroneil Ganguly, and Allen Brackley

United States 

Department of 

Agriculture

Forest Service

Pacific Northwest 

Research Station

General Technical Report

PNW-GTR-775

January 2009

DEPAR TMENT OF AGRICULT URE
Authors

Joseph A. Roos and Indroneil Ganguly are research associates, University of 

Washington, Seattle, WA 98105; and Allen Brackley is a research forester, U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, 

Alaska Wood Utilization Research and Development Center, 204 Siginaka Way, 

Sitka, AK 99835.

Cover photo by Maria Stiefel.

The Forest Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture is dedicated to the principle of 

multiple use management of the Nation’s forest resources for sustained yields of wood, 

water, forage, wildlife, and recreation. Through forestry research, cooperation with the 

States and private forest owners, and management of the National Forests and National 

Grasslands, it strives—as directed by Congress—to provide increasingly greater service 

to a growing Nation.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and 

activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, 

sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic 

information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual’s income 

is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all 

programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of 

program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET 

Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write 

USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 

20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal 

opportunity provider and employer.
Abstract

Roos, Joseph A.; Ganguly, Indroneil; Brackley, Allen 2009. Adoption of 

engineered wood products in Alaska. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-775. Portland, 

OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research 

Station. 10 p.

Based on an in-grade testing program, the Ketchikan Wood Technology 

Center has registered three proprietary grademarks for Alaska species of hemlock 

(Tsuga heteraphylla (Raf.) Sarg.), yellow-cedar (Chamaecyparis nootkatensis

(D. Don) Spach), and spruce (combined Sitka spruce [Picea sitchensis (Bong.) 

Carr.] and white spruce [Picea glauca (Moench) Voss]). The Ketchikan Wood 

Technology Center conducted tests to establish glulam beam manufacturing 

specifications. In conjunction with this program, there is a need to measure the 

market for glulam beams in Alaska. The purpose of this research was to compare 

Alaska residential builder adoption rates of glulam beams and other engineered 

wood products to those of the continental United States. The results showed that a 

higher percentage of Alaska builders use glulam beams compared with builders in 

the rest of the United States. 

Keywords: Alaska, glulam, glu-lam, engineered wood, lumber.
Contents

1 Introduction

4 Results

4 Glulam Beam Usage

5 Wood I-Joist Usage

6 Laminated Veneer Lumber

6 Timberstrand

6 Parallam

8 Conclusions

9 Literature Cited
Adoption of Engineered Wood Products in Alaska

Introduction

Since the closure of the Sitka Pulp Mill in 1993 and the Ketchikan Pulp Corporation in 1997, Alaska has been redefining its role in the forest products industry. 

Research has shown that Alaska forest products compete directly with other 

resources in the global market (Stevens and Brooks 2003). Thus, Alaska forest 

products must differentiate themselves in order to compete in the global market. 

The Ketchikan Wood Technology Center has undertaken an in-grade testing 

program to evaluate structural values unique to Alaska species. The results of this 

in-grade testing program are three Western Wood Products Association (WWPA) 

registered grademarks for Alaska species of hemlock (Tsuga heteraphylla (Raf.) 

Sarg.), yellow-cedar (Chamaecyparis nootkatensis (D. Don) Spach), and spruce 

(Picea sitchensis (Bong.) Carr.) (WWPA 2005). One potential use for Alaska species is as laminated stock (lamstock) lumber used to manufacture glulam beams. 

Glulam beams have a variety of residential construction applications including floor 

beams, headers, and roof beams (table 1). Additionally, glulam beams are used in 

nonresidential construction such as office buildings, stores, schools, and recreation 

facilities, and industrial construction such as bridges, utility poles, towers, and 

marinas (Adair 2007).

Glulam beams, which are laid up and glued together, are made from lamstock 

lumber. The grading system used for most lamstock is that of the American Institute of Timber Construction (AITC) Inspection Bureau Laminating Grades. The 

AITC designates laminating grades with an “L” with the exception of southern 

yellow pine (Pinus palustris Mill.), which uses an “N” (AITC 2004). The grade 

follows the letter, and then the density is designated with a letter (table 2). For 

example, L2D stands for “laminating grade 2, dense.” 

Green et al. (1999) demonstrated that a significant amount of high-quality 

structural lumber can be produced from Alaska hemlock logs. When graded as 

lamstock, approximately 28 percent made the highest grade (L1) and more than 85 

percent of the L1 and L2 grades qualified as “dense” (table 3). 

Table 1—Percentage of glulam beam end uses in Alaska, 2004

Application Percentage

Residential floor beam 37

Nonresidential 25

Residential garage door header 19

Residential window and door header 11

Residential roof beams 4

Industrial 3

Source: Adair 2007.

A significant amount of 

high-quality structural 

lumber can be produced from Alaska 

hemlock logs.
2

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-775

A feasibility study by the University of Alaska examined the return on investment of manufacturing glulam beams in Alaska (Allen and Gorman 2003). This 

study focused on the cost of inputs but did not examine what percentage of Alaska 

residential construction builders were using glulam beams. The purpose of this 

research is to build on the Allen and Gorman (2003) research and measure what 

percentage of Alaska’s residential construction builders are using glulam and other 

engineered wood products compared with the rest of the United States.

Data were collected via a phone survey conducted by a local market research 

firm in fall 2005. The phone interviewers were familiar with the range of wood 

products included in the survey. The sample frame was obtained from infoUSA 

through a systematic random sampling based on the homebuilder standard industrial classification code. 

The sample frame was divided into two categories. The first category was 

Alaska homebuilders, and the second category was homebuilders from all U.S. 

States excluding Alaska. For the non-Alaska U.S. homebuilder category, the sampling was proportional to the percentage of total U.S. housing starts in each respective state in 2003 (table 4). The states excluding Alaska are referred to in the paper 

as “the rest of the United States.” For the Alaska category, the sampling was done 

at a higher percentage than Alaska’s percentage of total U.S. housing starts. The 

oversampling for Alaska was necessary to obtain adequate degrees of freedom for 

statistical comparisons.

Table 2—American Institute of Timber Construction Inspection Bureau laminating grades

 Knot sizes

Lam Growth Slope of Knot Board size Knot

grade rate grain sizes 2 by 4 2 by 6 2 by 8 2 by 10 2 by 12 spacing

- - - - - - - - - - - - -Inches - - - - - - - - - - - - -

L1 Dense 1:14 1/4 7/8 1 3/8 1 13/16 2 5/16 2 13/16 Well spaced

L1 CL Close 1:12 1/4 7/8 1 3/8 1 13/16 2 5/16 2 13/16 Well spaced

L2D Dense 1:12 1/3 1 3/16 1 13/16 2 7/16 3 1/16 3 3/4 Well spaced

L2 Medium 1:12 1/3 1 3/16 1 13/16 2 7/16 3 1/16 3 3/4 Well spaced

L3 Medium 1:8 1/2 1 3/4 2 3/4 3 5/8 4 5/8 5 5/8 Well spaced

Source: AITC 2004.

Table 3—Alaska hemlock 

lamstock yields

Grade Yield percentage

L1 28.5

L2 16.8

L3 16.6

Source: Green et al. 1999.
Adoption of Engineered Wood Products in Alaska

Table 4—Regional sample frame summary based on 2004 housing starts

Western Respondents Eastern Respondents

United Housing U.S. to call per United Housing U.S. to call per

States starts starts state States starts starts state

No. Percent No. No. Percent No.

Northwest: Northeast:

Alaska 3,003 0.17 37 Connecticut 9,731 0.56 1

California (North)a 95,744 5.48 15 Delaware 6,331 0.36 1

Idaho 13,488 0.77 2 Illinois 60,971 3.49 7

Iowa 14,789 0.85 2 Indiana 39,596 2.27 5

Minnesota 38,977 2.23 4 Maine 7,201 0.41 1

Montana 3,574 0.20 0 Maryland 29,293 1.68 2

Nebraska 9,278 0.53 1 Massachusetts 17,465 1.00 2

North Dakota 3,265 0.19 1 Michigan 49,968 2.86 6

Oregon 22,186 1.27 3 New Hampshire 8,708 0.50 1

South Dakota 4,816 0.28 1 New Jersey 30,441 1.74 3

Washington 40,200 2.30 5 New York 49,149 2.81 6

Wyoming 2,045 0.12 1 Ohio 51,246 2.93 6

Total Northwest 251,365 14 72 Pennsylvania 45,114 2.58 5

Rhode Island 2,848 0.16 1

Southwest: Vermont 3,072 0.18 1

Arizona 66,031 3.78 8 Washington, DC 1,591 0.09 1

Arkansas 12,436 0.71 1 West Virginia 4,890 0.28 1

California (South)a 63,829 3.65 7 Wisconsin 38,208 2.19 4

Colorado 47,871 2.74 5 Total Northeast 455,823 26 54

Hawaii 5,902 0.34 1

Kansas 12,983 0.74 1 Southeast:

Missouri 28,255 1.62 5 Alabama 18,403 1.05 2

New Mexico 12,066 0.69 1 Florida 185,431 10.61 20

Nevada 35,615 2.04 4 Georgia 97,523 5.58 11

Oklahoma 12,979 0.74 1 Kentucky 19,459 1.11 3

Texas 165,027 9.44 19 Louisiana 18,425 1.05 2

Utah 19,327 1.11 2 Mississippi 11,276 0.65 1

Total Southwest 482,321 28 55 North Carolina 79,824 4.57 9

South Carolina 34,104 1.95 4

Tennessee 34,273 1.96 4

Virginia 59,445 3.40 7

Total Southeast 558,163 32 63

Total West 733,686 42 127 Total East 1,013,986 58 117

a Estimates for northern and southern California obtained using California housing start data.
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-775

A total of 244 eligible homebuilders were successfully interviewed. The final 

sample consisted of 207 residential homebuilders from the rest of the United States 

category and 37 residential homebuilders from the Alaska category. The statistical 

analysis was done using SPSS statistical software.

Results

The two main demographic variables collected were annual revenue and number 

of employees. The mean annual revenue figure for the total sample was $1,213,482 

with 95 percent confidence interval of $980,944 to $1,446,019 (table 5). Mean 

annual revenue for Alaska firms were $1.86 million with 95 percent confidence 

interval of $165,931 to $3,560,069. The Alaska mean revenue figures were higher 

than the rest of the U.S. category, which had mean annual revenue of $1.16 million.

The mean number of employees for the total sample was 6.27 with 95 percent 

confidence interval of 3.49 to 9.05 (table 6). The mean number of employees for 

Alaska firms was 8.89 with 95 percent confidence interval of 2.34 to 15.44. The 

Alaska employee mean was higher than the rest of the U.S. category, which had a 

mean of 6.03 employees. 

Another interesting figure that can be derived from the data collected is sales 

per employee. Alaska sales per employee was $2.1 million compared with $1.9 

million for the rest of the United States.

Glulam Beam Usage

Glued laminated (glulam) beams are engineered wood products used in a variety 

of structural and architectural applications. Glulam is made up of individual 

Table 5—Respondent mean annual revenue

95 percent confidence

interval Standard

Category Mean Lower bound Upper bound deviation

Dollars

Alaska 1,863,000 165,931 3,560,069 3,412,645

Rest of the United States 1,155,604 944,705 1,366,503 1,520,126

Total sample 1,213,482 980,944 1,446,019 1,750,045

Table 6—Respondent mean number of employees

95 percent confidence

 interval Standard 

Category Mean Lower bound Upper bound deviation

Alaska 8.89 2.34 15.44 14.21

Rest of the United States 6.03 3.05 9.02 21.41

Total sample 6.27 3.49 9.05 20.68
Adoption of Engineered Wood Products in Alaska

pieces of lumber finger-jointed together into long laminations that are then bonded 

together with adhesives (Falk and Colling 1995). Structural applications include 

trusses, headers for windows, entry and garage doors, and structural members for 

commercial structures. Generally, glulam ranges in depth from 6 to 72 inches and 

can be manufactured in lengths up to 100 feet (APA EWS 2004). Architects often 

use glulam beams in their designs to bring the beauty of wood to the interior of a 

structure. Glulam beams can also be curved to bring unique symmetry to interiors. 

One example of how glulam can contribute both structurally and aesthetically to a 

building is the Beaverton City Library (APA EWS 2001). This design incorporates 

four glulam columns that are bound together at the base and then curve up and 

branch out to support the ceiling structure, creating the appearance of a forest of 

glulam trees.

The survey results showed that 94.6 percent of Alaska’s residential construction 

builders use glulam beams (table 7). This result was significantly higher than the 

rest of the United States, where 75.9 percent of builders responded that they had 

used glulam beams. 

Wood I-Joist Usage

I-joists are “I” shaped engineered wood products designed for use in floor and roof 

construction (APA EWS 2004). I-joists are manufactured using sawn wood or 

Table 7—Use of glulam, wood I-joist, laminated veneer, Timberstrand, and 

Parallam in Alaska and other U.S. States, 2005

Mean Standard 2-tailed

Category and region	 Number	 use	 deviation	 significance

- - - - - - - - - - Percent - - - - - - - - -

Glulam beam usage

Alaska 37 94.6 22.9

Rest of the United States 203 75.9 42.9 0.01

Wood I-joist usage

Alaska 35 91.4 28.4

Rest of the United States 204 81.9 38.6 .16

Laminated veneer lumber usage

Alaska 37 86.5 34.6

Rest of the United States 205 80.5 39.7 .39

Timberstrand usage

Alaska 34 35.3 48.5

Rest of the United States 205 58.5 49.4 .01

Parallam usage

Alaska 32 40.6 50

Rest of the United States 205 70.2 45.8 .00

Nearly 95 percent of 

Alaska’s residential 

construction builders 

use glulam beams.
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-775

composite lumber for flanges and plywood or oriented strand board for the web. 

Common depths are 9 1/2 inches, 11 7/8 inches, 14 inches, and 16 inches. Flange 

widths commonly range from 1 1/2 inches to 3 1/2 inches. The sample results 

showed that 91.4 percent of residential construction builders in Alaska and 81.9 

percent of residential construction builders in the rest of the United States use wood 

I-joists (see table 7). In contrast to glulam beams, I-joists showed no significant 

difference between Alaska usage and the rest of the U.S. usage.

Laminated Veneer Lumber

Laminated veneer lumber (LVL) is manufactured by bonding layers of dried veneer 

similar to the process of plywood manufacturing. After the veneers are layed up 

with a waterproof adhesive, they are cured in a heated press creating blocks of 

materials called billets. Laminated veneer lumber is produced in various thicknesses and widths and is used in structural applications including headers, beams, 

valley rafters, and scaffold planking (APA EWS 2004). The survey results showed 

that 86.5 percent of Alaska’s residential construction builders use laminated veneer 

lumber compared with 80.5 percent of residential construction builders in other 

states (see table 7). These results were not significantly different. 

Timberstrand®1

Timberstrand is a laminated strand lumber product from Weyerhaeuser. The 

manufacturing process uses long strands of wood fiber bonded with special resins 

and cured with a steam injection process, producing large billets up to 64 feet long, 

8 feet wide, and 3 1/2 inches thick (http://www.weyerhaeuser.com).

The sample results showed that 35.3 percent of Alaska’s residential construction 

builders use Timberstrand compared with 58.5 percent of residential construction 

builders in other states (see table 7). Alaska builders used significantly less Timberstrand than the other U.S. states category. The reason for this difference may be 

that Weyerhaeuser has not marketed the Timberstrand as aggressively in Alaska 

compared with other states.

Parallam®

Parallam is also a proprietary Weyerhaeuser parallel strand lumber product. This 

product can be used for headers, beams columns, and posts and can also be treated 

for exterior applications. The sample results showed that 40.6 percent of Alaska’s 

1 The use of trade or firm names in this publication is for reader information and does not 

imply endorsement by the U.S. Department of Agriculture of any product or service.
Adoption of Engineered Wood Products in Alaska

residential construction builders use Parallam compared with 70.2 percent of 

residential construction builders in other states (see table 7). As with Timberstrand, 

Alaska builders used significantly less Parallam than the other states. 

A clustered bar graph comparing the number of substitute products used by 

the homebuilders in Alaska and the rest of United States is presented in fig. 1. The 

figure reveals that the number of engineered wood products used by homebuilders in Alaska ranges from three to eight products. The usage of engineered wood 

products by the homebuilders from the rest of the United States ranges from 1 to 11 

products. The results showed that more than 42 percent of the homebuilders from 

rest of the United States category indicated they used seven or more engineered 

wood products, whereas only 11.5 percent of the homebuilders from the Alaska 

category indicated usage of seven or more engineered wood products. Furthermore, 

17 percent of the homebuilders from the rest of United States indicated usage of 

nine or more of the engineered wood products included in the survey, whereas none 

of the homebuilders from Alaska indicated usage of more than eight engineered 

wood products. Although there was a higher usage of engineered wood products in 

Figure 1—Cumulative number of engineered products used.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Number of substitute products used

Respondents (percentage)

Rest of United States Alaska
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-775

the rest of the U.S. category, multiple engineered wood product usage by all homebuilders surveyed in Alaska indicates a general acceptability of these products.

Conclusions 

The results of this research can be summarized into two main conclusions. The first 

is that Alaska builders do not use as many engineered wood products as builders in 

other U.S. States. The two products where Alaska’s usage lagged behind that of the 

other U.S. States were the two Weyerhaeuser products Timberstrand and Parallam. 

This may indicate that Weyerhaeuser has not focused their marketing as strongly on 

Alaska as on other parts of the United States. 

The second conclusion is that builders in Alaska (94.6 percent) use a higher 

percentage of glulam beams than builders in other U.S. States, despite the fact that 

they are not manufactured in Alaska. 

Allen and Gorman (2003) examined the feasibility of producing glulam beams 

in Alaska considering raw materials, labor, and capital cost. This report found that 

the cost of producing glulam beams in Alaska appears to be relatively high and that 

the feasibility would depend on the market price for glulam beams. The Ketchikan 

Wood Technology Center has shown, through their in-grade testing program that 

Alaska timber has higher strength properties suitable for lamstock to manufacture 

glulam beams. Green et al. (1999) showed that a high percentage of Alaska hemlock 

qualifies for the lamstock grades listed in table 3. This study built upon previous 

research and showed that 94.6 percent of builders in Alaska sampled use glulam 

beams. 

We estimate the annual Alaska glulam beam usage to be about 1 million board 

feet per year. This estimation is based on total U.S. production of glulam beams in 

2007 being 414 million board feet (Adair 2007). Extrapolating that Alaska uses 0.24 

percent of the total U.S. consumption, a price estimate of $900 per thousand board 

feet is used to calculate an annual market value of $900,000. It must be noted that 

these estimates are based on quantity and price figures that are very rough.

If Alaska wishes to enter the glulam beam industry, there are two options. The 

first is to produce lamstock graded lumber and sell to glulam beam manufacturers 

in the lower 48 States. The second option is to move one more step up the valueadded chain and establish glulam beam manufacturing facilities in Alaska. 

Our results showed that a large majority of Alaska builders are using glulam 

beams, so the market is established. Thus, marketing strategy could focus on 

penetrating this market with locally produced glulam beams and increasing the 

total glulam beam market. In addition to the residential construction market, there 

is ample opportunity in the commercial construction market to substitute glulam 

Builders in Alaska use 

a higher percentage 

of glulam beams than 

builders in other U.S. 

States.
9

Adoption of Engineered Wood Products in Alaska

beams for steel beams (APA EWS 1999). Producers could also research markets 

beyond Alaska including the lower 48 States and Asia (Sasatani et al. 2005).

Producers in the Pacific Northwest (Washington and Oregon) also have an 

option for taking advantage of the high yields of lamstock from Alaska species. In 

March 2007, the Regional Forester for Alaska approved the limited sale of Sitka 

spruce and western hemlock to the lower 48 States.2 The exportable material 

includes the low-grade pulpwood quality logs included in the report by Green et al. 

(1999). Purchase of this material for production of dimension lumber and lamstock 

in a segregated production line would allow grading by using the new Alaska 

grademarks.

Literature Cited

Adair, C. 2007. Regional production and market outlook for structural panels and 

engineered wood products 2007-2012. Tacoma, WA: APA–The Engineered Wood 

Association Publication. 72 p.

Allen, T.; Gorman, B. 2003. A feasibility study assessing the manufacturing 

of glulam beams in Alaska. October. Anchorage, AK: University of Alaska 

Fairbanks Cooperative Extension. 16 p.

American Institute of Timber Construction [AITC]. 2004. Standard 

specifications for structural glued laminated timber of softwood species: AITC 

117-2004. Centennial, CO: American Institute of Timber Construction. 68 p. 

APA-Engineered Wood Systems [APA EWS]. 1999. Substitution of glulam beams 

for steel or solid-sawn lumber. Form No. EWS S570G. Tacoma, WA: APA-The 

Engineered Wood Association. 44 p.

APA-Engineered Wood Systems [APA EWS]. 2001. Beaverton city library: a 

forest of glulam. Case study A115. Tacoma, WA: APA–The Engineered Wood 

Association. 2 p.

APA-Engineered Wood Systems [APA EWS]. 2004. A guide to engineered wood 

products. Publ. C800. Tacoma, WA: APA–The Engineered Wood Association. 12 

p.

Falk, R.H.; Colling, F. 1995. Laminating effects in glued-laminated timber beams. 

Journal of Structural Engineering. December: 1857-1863. 

2 Bschor, D.E. 2007 (14 March). Letter to Forest Supervisor, Tongass National Forest. Limited interstate shipments of unprocessed Sitka spruce and western hemlock timber. Juneau, 

AK: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Alaska Region. 1 p. www.fs.fed.

us/r10/ro/policy-reports/for_mgmt/ship_timber/FS_correspondence3_13.doc. (17 July).
10

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-775

Green, D.W.; McDonald, K.A.; Dramm, J.; Kilborn, K. 1999. Grading options 

for western hemlock “pulpwood” logs from southeastern Alaska. Res. Pap. FPLRP-583. Madison, WI: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Forest 

Products Laboratory. 15 p.

Stevens, J.A.; Brooks, D.J. 2003. Alaska softwood market price arbitrage. Res. 

Pap. PNW-RP-556. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 12 p.

Sasatani, D.; Roos, J.; Brackley, A.; Eastin, I. 2005. Niche market opportunities 

for Alaska forest products in Japan (2005 update). Working Paper 100. Seattle, 

WA: Center for International Trade in Forest Products (CINTRAFOR). 52 p.

Western Wood Products Association [WWPA]. 2005. Design values and spans 

for Alaska species lumber. Tech. Note TN05-01/Rev2-05. Portland, OR: Western 

Wood Products Association. 6 p.

Pacific Northwest Research Station

Web site http://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/

Telephone (503) 808-2592

Publication requests (503) 808-2138

FAX (503) 808-2130

E-mail pnw_pnwpubs@fs.fed.us

Mailing address Publications Distribution

Pacific Northwest Research Station

P.O. Box 3890

Portland, OR 97208-3890
U.S. Department of Agriculture

Pacific Northwest Research Station

333 SW First Avenue

P.O. Box 3890

Portland, OR 97208-3890

Official Business

Penalty for Private Use, $300