As a LVL supplier with over a decade of on-the-ground experience collaborating with bridge builders across North America, I’ve seen firsthand how Laminated Veneer Lumber (LVL) has transformed modern bridge construction. Its consistent strength, dimensional stability, and ability to span long distances make it a go-to alternative to steel and concrete for many municipal and rural bridge projects. But for all its benefits, LVL isn’t a “set-it-and-forget-it” solution. In the years I’ve spent working with bridge engineers, contractors, and inspection teams, I’ve watched as teams tackled challenges that aren’t widely covered in trade brochures or product data sheets. These challenges aren’t dealbreakers, but they’re critical to address early in a project to avoid costly delays, safety risks, and budget overruns. LVL
The biggest hurdle we often face is understanding LVL’s unique performance in outdoor bridge environments. Unlike indoor applications—think roof beams or floor joists in a home—bridges are exposed to constant moisture, temperature fluctuations, and heavy use. LVL is made from thin wood veneers bonded together with industrial adhesives, and while modern formulations are designed for exterior use, they’re not impervious to water. Let me break this down: when LVL absorbs moisture, it swells, and when it dries, it shrinks. This movement isn’t uniform across all parts of a bridge—LVL beams sit at the center of the structure, while ends are exposed to rain, snow, and de-icing salts in cold climates. Over time, uneven swelling and shrinkage can cause joints to gap, which lets more water seep into the core of the beam. Once water gets past the outer veneers, it breaks down the adhesive bonds between layers, weakening the beam’s structural integrity. I remember a small rural bridge project in upstate New York a few years back where the contractor skipped a proper waterproofing sealant on the LVL girders. Within three years, the ends of the beams had warped so badly that the bridge had to be closed for repairs—a fix that cost the county twice what the LVL materials had. That’s a avoidable mistake, but it’s one that still happens because many teams don’t account for LVL’s moisture sensitivity during the design phase.
Closely tied to moisture is the challenge of corrosion—though not the kind you might expect. Steel rebar and metal connectors are standard in bridges, and when they’re paired with LVL, there’s a risk of galvanic corrosion. Here’s how that works: LVL is made from wood, which contains natural compounds like tannins and acids. When moisture is present, these compounds act as an electrolyte, creating a chemical reaction that eats away at metal hardware. I’ve seen galvanized metal bolts and connectors that paired with untreated LVL turn rusty within two years, even when they were rated for outdoor use. The problem gets worse in areas with heavy de-icing salts, which amplify the electrolyte reaction. To mitigate this, we started offering “corrosion-resistant” LVL at our company years ago, which has a treated veneer that neutralizes the wood’s acid content. But many contractors still don’t specify this, either because they don’t know it exists or because they’re trying to cut costs on hardware. It’s a balance—using the right hardware with the right LVL isn’t just an afterthought, it’s a structural necessity.
Another challenge is the limited track record of LVL in large-scale bridge projects, especially compared to steel or concrete. For decades, bridges have been built with materials that engineers and inspectors can reference from thousands of past projects. LVL, by contrast, is a relatively young material in bridge construction—most widespread adoption only happened in the last 15 to 20 years. That means there are gaps in building codes and inspection standards specific to LVL. For example, how do you measure the load capacity of a LVL beam after 20 years of outdoor exposure? What are the exact tolerances for shrinkage that engineers need to account for in span calculations? The American Wood Council has updated its standards, but they’re still not as granular as those for steel or concrete. Last year, we worked with a bridge engineering firm in Ohio that struggled to get local inspection approval for a 50-foot LVL span. The inspector was used to concrete and needed to see data on long-term LVL performance that simply wasn’t available in the local code. We had to pull together third-party test reports from similar projects across the Midwest to get approval, which added two weeks to the project timeline. For contractors working on tight deadlines, that kind of uncertainty is a big problem.
Then there’s the issue of transportation and handling. LVL beams are light compared to steel or concrete girders—a 60-foot LVL beam might weigh 1,200 pounds, while a steel beam of the same length can weigh over 6,000 pounds. On paper, that sounds like a benefit—easier to transport, less heavy equipment needed on-site. But LVL is also more brittle than steel. I’ve seen LVL beams crack during transportation because they were secured too tightly to a flatbed truck, or dropped accidentally during offloading. Unlike steel, which can be bent or even cut on-site to adjust for a misalignment, LVL can’t be modified without weakening its structural integrity. If you drill a hole in a LVL beam in the wrong place, for example, you reduce its load capacity by up to 30 percent, according to our material testing data. That means contractors have to plan every cut and hole in advance, and they can’t make last-minute adjustments on-site. On a project where utility lines run under the bridge or the site layout changes unexpectedly, that inflexibility can lead to delays and wasted material. We now offer pre-drilled LVL beams for standard connector points, which helps, but it’s still not a perfect solution for custom projects.
Cost is another challenge, though it’s often misunderstood. LVL is usually cheaper than steel or concrete for smaller to mid-sized bridges, but when you factor in the extra work required for waterproofing, corrosion-resistant hardware, and careful handling, the total cost can add up. I’ve had contractors come to us expecting LVL to be a budget-friendly shortcut, only to be surprised when they realize they need to spend more on preparation and materials to get it right. It’s not that LVL is expensive—it’s that it has hidden costs that aren’t obvious at the start. For example, a concrete bridge might require less on-site preparation, but the LVL needs to be stored indoors before installation, or covered with a waterproof tarp to prevent moisture absorption. If a contractor doesn’t budget for that storage, the LVL might be damaged before it’s even placed, leading to extra costs.
But here’s the thing: these challenges aren’t insurmountable. In the 10 years I’ve been in this business, I’ve seen contractors and engineers adapt—we’ve developed solutions that make LVL a viable, sustainable choice for bridges. For example, we work with customers to provide custom moisture-resistant LVL, paired with recommendations for hardware that’s tested to work with wood. We also offer on-site support to help contractors handle and install beams correctly, reducing the risk of cracks or damage. And as more LVL bridges are built, we’re sharing data about their long-term performance to update codes and standards, making it easier for inspectors and engineers to trust the material.
What I want to make clear is that LVL isn’t a replacement for traditional building materials—it’s a complementary option that works best when paired with the right planning. If you’re a contractor or engineer working on a bridge project, don’t just look at LVL’s benefits—talk to a supplier who understands the unique challenges of outdoor use. At our company, we don’t just sell LVL; we walk through the challenges with you, from moisture protection to code compliance, to make sure your project goes smoothly. We’ve helped hundreds of teams avoid the mistakes I mentioned earlier, and we’re ready to do the same for your project.
If you’re considering LVL for your next bridge construction project, or if you have questions about how to address the challenges I’ve outlined, don’t hesitate to reach out. We offer custom consultations, material testing support, and guidance every step of the way to ensure your bridge is safe, durable, and cost-effective.
Melamine Board References
American Wood Council. (2022). National Design Specification for Wood Construction.
International Code Council. (2021). International Building Code, Chapter 23: Wood Construction.
Wood Products Industry Association. (2023). Exterior Laminated Veneer Lumber Performance Standards.
National Association of County Engineers. (2022). Rural Bridge Construction Material Best Practices.
Journal of Bridge Engineering. (2021). Long-Term Durability of LVL Bridges in Cold Climates.
Lisen Wood Industrial Shouguang Co., Ltd.
Lisen Wood Industrial Shouguang Co., Ltd. is one of the most professional lvl manufacturers and suppliers in China, featured by quality products and low price. Please rest assured to buy discount lvl from our factory. Welcome to contact us for quotation and free sample.
Address: Nongsheng road, shouguang,shandong province, china
E-mail: liuzhenxi@lisenboard.com
WebSite: https://www.sglswood.com/
