National Bure^c; ..a

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

BUILDING

MATERIALS

AND

STRUCTURES

REPORT BMS61

Structural Properties of Two

Nonreinforced Monolithic

Concrete Wall Constructions

HERBERT L. WHITrR^S^ORE^

AMBROSE H. STJ^T^G, and

DOU GLA§^.'£^PARSONS
The program of research on building materials and structures, carried on by the

National Bureau of Standards, was undertaken with the assistance of the Central Housing Committee, an informal organization of governmental agencies concerned with

housing construction and finance, which is cooperating in the investigations through a committee of principal technicians.

CENTRAL HOUSING COMMITTEE

ON EESEARCH, DESIGN, AND CONSTRUCTION

A. C. Shiee, Chairman. Howard P. Vermilya, Vice Chairman.

United States Housing Authority. Federal Housing Administration.

Sterling R. March, Secretary.

Pierre Blouke,

Federal Home Loan Bank Board

Hugh L. Dryden,

National Bureau of Standards.

Louis A. Simon,

Pubhc Buildings Administration

Luther M. Leisenring,

Construction Division (War).

Edward A. Poynton,

Office of Indian Affairs.

John S. Donovan,

Farm Security Administration.

George W. Trayer,

Forest Service (F. P. Laboratory).

Joseph M. DallaValle,

PubUc Health Service.

George E. Knox,

Yards and Docks (Navy).

William R. Talbott,

Veterans' Administration.

Wallace Ashby,

Bureau of Agricultural Chemistry and Engineering.

NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

STAFF COMMITTEE ON ADMINISTRATION AND COORDINATION

Hugh L. Dryden, Chairman.

Mechanics and Sound.

Phaon H. Bates, Gustav E. F. Lundell,

Clay and Silicate Products. Chemistry.

HoBART C. Dickinson, Addams S. McAllister,

Heat and Power. Codes and Specifications.

Warren E. Emley, Henry S. Rawdon,

Organic and Fibrous Materials. Metallurgy.

The Forest Products Laboratory of the Forest Service is cooperating with both

committees on investigations of wood constructions.

[For list of BMS publications and directions for purchasing, see cover page in]
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE • Jesse H. Jones, Secretary

NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS • Lyman J. Briggs, Director

BUILDING MATERIALS

and STRUCTURES

REPORT BMS61

Structural Properties ot Two Ncjnreinforced Monolithic

Concrete Wall Constructions

by HERBERT L. WHITTEMORE, AMBROSE H. STANG,

and DOUGLAS e. parsons

ISSUED OCTOBER 28, 1940

The National Bureau of Standards is a tact-finding organization;

it does not "approve" any particular material or method of construction. The technical findings in this series ot reports are to be construed accordingly.

UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE • WASHINGTON • I94O

FOR SALE BY THE SUPERINTENDENT OF DOCUMENTS, WASHINGTON, D. C. • PRICE 10 CENTS
Foreword

This report is one of a series issued by the National Bureau of Standards on tlie structural properties of constructions intended for low-cost houses and apartments. These

constructions were sponsored by organizations within the building industry advocating

and promoting their use. The sponsor built and submitted the specimens described in

this report for participation in the program outlined in BMS2, Methods of Determining

the Structural Properties of Low-Cost House Constructions. The sponsor, therefore,

is responsible for the design of the constructions and for the description of materials

and methods of fabrication. The Bureau is responsible for the testing of the specimens

and the preparation of the report.

This report covers only the load-deformation relations and strength of the structural

element submitted when subjected to compressive, transverse, impact, concentrated, and

racking loads by standardized methods simulating the loads to which the element would

be subjected in actual service.

The National Bureau of Standards does not "approve" a construction, nor does it express an opinion as to its merits for reasons given in reports BMSl and BMS2. The

technical facts presented in this series provide the basic data from which architects and

engineers can determine whether a construction meets desired performance requirements.

Lyman J. Briggs, Director.

In]
Structural Properties of Two Nonreinforced Monolithic Concrete

Wall Constructions

by HERBERT L. WHITTEMOR E, AMBROSE H. STANG, and DOUGLAS E. PARSONS

CON

Page

Foreword ii I. Introduction 1 II. Sponsor 2

III. Specimens and tests 2 IV. Materials 3

1. Cement 3

2. Aggregates. __ 3

(a) Fine. 3

(b) Coarse 3 V. WaU CZ 4

1. Description 4

(a) Four-foot wall specimens 4

(b) Eight-foot wall specimens. . 5

2. Compressive load 6

3. Transverse load 7

E N T S

Page

V. Wall CZ—Continued.

4. Impact load 7

5. Concentrated load 7

6. Racking load 7 VI. Wall DA_ 9

1. Description 9

(a) Four-foot wall specimens 9

(b) Eight-foot wall specimens 9

2. Compressive load. 10

3. Transverse load 10

4. Impact load 10

5. Concentrated load 10

6. Racking load 10 VII. Comments 11

ABSTRACT

For the program on the determination of the structural properties of low-cost house constructions, the Masonry Construction Section of the National Bureau

of Standards built 24 specimens representing two

nonreinforced monolithic concrete wall constructions. The only difference in their construction was in the proportions of the concrete. The specimens were subjected to compressive, transverse, impact, concentrated, and racking loads. For

each of these loads three like specimens were tested. The deformation under load and the set after the load was removed were measured for each increment of load; the results are presented in graphs and a table.

I. INTRODUCTION

To provide technical facts on the performance of constructions for low-cost houses, to discover promising new constructions, and

ultimately to determine the properties neces- sary for acceptable performance in actual

service, the National Bm-eau of Standards

invited the cooperation of the building industry

in a program of research on building materials

and structures suitable for low-cost houses and

apartments. The objectives of this program

are described in BMSl, Research on Building

Materials and Structures for Use in Low-Cost

Housing.

To determine the strength of house constructions in the laboratory, standardized methods

were developed for applying loads to specimens

simulating portions of a completed house.

Included in tliis study were masonry and wood

constructions of types which have been extensively used in this country for houses and whos(>

behavior under widely different service conditions is well known to builders and the public.

The reports on these constructions are BMS5,

Structural Properties of Six Masonry Wall

Constructions, and BMS25, Structural Properties of Conventional Wood-Frame Constructions for Walls, Partitions, Floors, and Roofs.

The masonry specimens were built by the

Masonry Construction Section of this Bureau,

and the wood-frame specimens were built and

tested by the Forest Products Laboratory at Madison, Wis.

The present report describes the structural

proi^erties of two monolithic concrete walls

thinner but otherwise similar to types widely

used as foundations for buildings. Although

the compressive and transverse strengths of monolithic concrete walls have been investigated previously,^ it seemed desirable to obtain

additional data on the properties of nonreinforced concrete walls and to determine their

resistances to racking, impact, and concenI Frank E. Richart and Nathan M. Newmark, TAe strength of monolithic concrete walls. Bui. Univ. 111. Engrg. Expt. Sta. 277 (1935).

261298° -40 [1]
tratecl loads. As the behavior of concrete

walls in service as foundations for houses is known, this report gives information on conventional masonry constructions supplementing

thatinBMS5.

Compressive, transverse, impact, concentrated, and racking loads were applied to the

specunens, producing effects similar to those

resulting from loads which occur in an occupied

house. In actual service, compressive loads on

a foundation wall are produced by the weight

of the roof, walls, furniture, and occupants, and snow and wind loads on the roof. Transverse

loads on a wall are produced by the earth in

contact with the wall, impact and concentrated

loads by furniture or accidental contact with

heavy objects, and racking loads by action of the

wind on the walls above the foundation.

The deflection and set under each increment

of load were measured, because the suitability

of a wall construction depends not only on its resistance to deformation when loads are applied, but also on its ability to return to its original size and shape when the loads are removed.

II. SPONSOR

The specmiens were built by the Masonry

Construction Section of the National Bureau

of Standards.

III. SPECIMENS AND TESTS

The only difference in the wall constructions was in the proportions of the concrete. One

construction was assigned the symbol CZ and

the other the symbol VA. The individual

specunens were assigned the designations given

in table 1.

Table 1.

Specimen designations, walls CZ and DA

Specimen designation

Cl, Ct, C,3_ Tl, T2, T3. 1UI2.IS...

PI, P2, PS.

Ml, m, MS.

Load

Compressive- - Transverse Impact » Ooncentrated- Eacking

Load applied

Upper end. Either face. Do. Do.

5 in. below upper end.

a The impact and concentrated loads were applied to the same speci- mens, the impact loads first.

Except as mentioned below, the specimens were tested in accordance with report BMS2,

which also gives the requirements for the specimens and describes the presentation of the

results of the tests, particularly the loaddeformation graphs.

The specmiens were cast in a vertical position. For the transverse and impact loads,

only tlu-ee specimens were built for each load,

because the specimens were syrmnetrical about

a vertical plane midway between the faces; the

results for transverse and impact loads applied

to one face should be identic with those

obtained by applying loads to the opposite

face. The concentrated loads were applied to one face only of each specimen for the same

reason. Under compressive load the shortening was

measured over the entire length of the specimen

by compressometers attached to the steel loading plates through which the load was applied,

not to the specimen as described in BMS2. The

speed of the movable head of the testing machine was adjusted to 0.044 in./min.

The lateral deflection under compressive load was measured with a deflectometer of fixed gage

length, which consisted of a light (duralumin)

tubular frame having a leg at one end and a

hinged plate at the other. The deflectometer was attached near the upper end of the specimen by clamping the hinged plate to either face; the deflectometer was vertical and the gage

length (distance between the points of support) was 7 ft. 6 in. A dial micrometer was attached

to the frame at midlength, with the spindle in

contact with the face of the waU specimen. The

dial was graduated to 0.001 in. and readings were recorded to the nearest division. There

were two deflectometers, one near each edge of

the specimen. This method of measurement was used instead of the taut-wire mirror-scale

method described in BMS2.

For the transverse and impact loads the wall

specimens were vertical. The lateral deflections

under transverse load were measured in the same way as for the compressive load.

The indentation under concentrated load and

the set after the load was removed were measured, instead of the set only, as described in BMS2. The apparatus is shown in figure 1. The load was applied to the thick steel disk, A,

to which the crossbar, B, was rigidly attached.

The load was measured by means of the dynamometer, C. Two stands, D, rested on the

[2]
Figure 1.

Apparatus for concent rnied-luad test.

A, steel disk; B, crossbar; C, dynamometer; D, stand; E, dial micrometer.

face of the specimen, each supporting a dial

micrometer, E, the spindle of which was in contact with the crossbar 8 in. from the center

of the disk. The micrometers were graduated

to 0.001 in. and readings were recorded to the

nearest division. The initial reading (average

of the micrometer readings) was observed under

the initial load, which included the weight of the disk and the dynamometer. A load was

applied to the disk and the average of the

micrometer readings minus the initial reading was taken as the depth of the indentation under

load. The set after the load was removed was

determined in the same manner. The deformations under racking loads were measured with a right-angle deformeter, consisting of a steel channel and a steel angle

braced to form a rigid connection. In use, the

channel of the deformeter rested along the top

of the specmien, with the steel angle extending

downward in the plane of the specimen. Two

pins passed snugly through holes in the channel

into the top of the specimen. A dial micrometer was attached to the steel angle. The

spindle of the micrometer was in contact with

the edge of the si:)ocimen. The gage lengtli

(distance from the top of the specimen to tfie spindle of the micrometer) was 6 ft. 8 in. The

micrometer was graduated to 0.001 in. and readings were recorded to the nearest tenth of a

division. This deformeter was used instead

of the taut-wire mirror-scale system described

in BMS2.

The tests were begun February 12, 1940 and

completed February 28, 1940.

IV. MATERIALS

1. Cement

The Portland cement complied with Federal

Specification SS-C-191a, Cement; Portland.

Delivered in bulk. Lehigh Portland Cement

Co., "Lehigh."

2. Aggregates

The aggregates were Potomac River sand

and gravel. The sieve analyses were made by

the materials inspectors of the District of Columbia stationed at the aggregate plant.

(o) Fine

The fine aggregate complied with Federal

Specification SS-A-281, Aggregate; (for) Port- land Cement Concrete, class 1, grade A. The

sieve analysis given in table 2 is the average

of six analyses.

Table 2.Sieve analysis of aggregates, walls CZ and DA

U. S. standard Sieve

Passing, by weight

Fine

aggregate

(sand)

C oarse aggregate

(gravel)

1 in Percent PercentICO95

43

3

Hia

Hia 10098

68

14

3

No. 4 No. 16 No. 50 No. 100

(6) Coarse

The coarse aggregate complied with Federal

Specification SS-A-281, Aggregate; (for) Port- land Cement Concrete, class 2, grade A. The

sieve analysis given in table 2 is the average

of 4 analyses.

[3]
V. WALL CZ

1. Description

Wall CZ was a nonreinforced monolithic

concrete wall. The concrete consisted of 1 part of Portland cement, 2.71 parts of sand, and

5.31 parts of gravel, by dry weight. Each face was concrete as poured.

The price of this construction in Washington,

D. C, as of July 1937, was $0.31/ft2.

(a) Four-Foot Wall Sx>ecimens

The wall specimens shown in figure 2 were 8

ft 3% in. high, 4 ft OKe in. wide, and 6'fs in. thick.

Form.—For convenience in handling the

Figure 2.Four-foot wall speci>?tens CZ and DA.

specimens, the wood form was assembled on a structural steel channel, with the flanges up. Each side of the form was plywood, Yu in. thick and 4 ft 0 in. wide—the width of the

specimen. The sides were nailed to four vertical studs, 2 by 4 in., with the 2-in. face in contact with the plywood. The studs were

spaced 1 ft 4 in. and the outside studs extended

one-half their thickness beyond the edge of the

plywood. Two plates, 4 ft 2 in. long, were

nailed along the tops of the studs.

The ends of the form, V/s by 7/8 in., M'ere placed between the outside studs and against

the plywood. The distance between the plywood sides was 6 in. To prevent spreading of the sides, wood ^ wales, 4 by 4 in., were placed on each side at heights of 9 in., 3 ft 9 in., and 7 ft 0 in. The

wales at each height were connected by steel

ties, ^2-in. diam. In the lower wales there were 5 ties. In the middle and upper wales

there were three ties. Concrete.—The concrete was transit-mixed

and consisted of 1 part of portland cement,

2.71 parts of sand, and 5.31 parts of gravel, b_y

dry weight; 1 part of portland cement, 3.0 parts of damp sand, and 5.0 parts of damp

gravel, by loose volume.

Table 3.

Physical properties of the concrete, wall CZ

TThe weight of the concrete, age either 28 or 29 days, based on the volun)e

of the walls, was 148 lb/ft»]

Specimen

Water,

per sack

of cement Slump

Compressive strengtli age 28 or 29 days

Cylinders cured with

wall speci- mens

Cylinders cured at 70° r and

95 to lOO'^, relative humidity

CI

gal

7. 5 7.5

8.2 8.2

7.5

7.5

.5.8 5.8

5.8

7.5

8.2

7.5

in.

76M

66M

4M

44M

4M

5

2, 180

2. 490

1,250

1, 550

1,500

1,500

2, 380

2, 280

2, 610

2, 150

1, 550

2, 010

3, 400

3, 900

2, ISO

2, 680

2. 690

3, 000

3, 620

3, 510

3, 730

3, 600

2, 480

3,200

Cf

C3

TlT«

T3

//12

13Rlm

R3

A\'erage 7.2 1, 950 3,170

For each specimen the slimip was determined

in accordance with ASTM Tentative Standard D 138-32 T, Method of Test for Consistency of Portland-Cement Concrete. Two

[i]
6- by 12-iii. cylinders were made from the same

concrete as for each specimen. One cyhnder was stored near the specimens and the other

at 70° F and a relative humidity of 95 to 100 percent.

The compressive strength of each cylinder was determined on the day the corresponding

floor specimen was tested, age either 28 or 29

days. The physical properties of the concrete

are given in table 3.

The concrete was cast in layers 12 in. deep

within ]% hours after mixing began and was

well rodded. The forms were removed the

second day after the concrete was placed.

The dejH'essions caused by the removal of the

ties were pointed with cement mortar.

(b) Eight-Foot \]'all Specim-ens

The S-ft wall specimens, shown in figure 3, were 8 ft 3% in. high, 8 ft 0}^ in. wide, and

FiGiTRE 3.

Eight-foot wall specimens CZ and DA.

[5]
GKe in. thick. They were similar to the 4-ft specimens.

The forms for the 8-ft specimens were similar

to those for the 4-ft specimens except that

there were two studs at midwidth, five ties in

the lower and the middle wales, and three in the upper wales.

2. Compressive Load

The results for wall specimens CZ-Cl, C2,

and C3 are given in table 4 and in figures 4 and 5.

Table 4.

Structural properties of nonreinforced monolitMc concrete wall constructions CZ and DA

[Weight, based on the face area: Wall CZ. 74.9 Ih/ft!; wall DA, 75.1 Ib./ft^l

Construction symbol

Load

Compressive « Transverse, span

7 ft. 6 in. Impact, span

7 ft. 6 in. Concentrated Racking

Speci- men

Maxi- mum

load

Speci- men

Maxi- mum

load

Speci- men

Maxi- mum

height

of drop

Speci- men

Maxi- mum

load

Speci- men

Maxi- mum

load

< 6. 25

6. 25

- 6. 25 CZ

^Kipslft

186

144

109

Tl

tb/P

253

277

266

n

ft

< 10. n

" 10. 0

' 10.0

PIP2

P3

lb

' 1,000

<• 1, 000

' 1, 000

Rl

T2 12 m

Average

T3 13 m

146 265 = 10.0 « 1, 000 6. 25 DA

fC?.... 189

179

149

Tl 297

216 220

n = 10.0

" 10.0

» 10.0

PI ' 1, 000

' 1,000

« 1, 000

Rl...... = 15. 25

' 6. 25

= 6. 25 T2 P2 R2

Average.

[cs.-.. T3 13 PS R3

172 244 ' 10. 0 ' 1, 000 '6. 25

» The compressive load was applied 2 in. (one-third of the thickness) from one face of the specimen,

b A kip is 1,000 lb.

" Test discontinued. Specimen did not fail.

shorten incj in/d ft Figure 4.

Compressive load on wall CZ.

Load-shortening (open circles) and load-set (solid circles) results for specimens CZ-Cl, C2, and CS. . Load applied 2 in. (one-third the

thickness) from one face. The loads are in kips per foot of actual width

of specimen.

0 O.OZ 0.04 0.06

la feral deflection in. Figure 5.

Compressive load on wall CZ.

Load-lateral deflection (open circles) and load lateral set (solid circles) for specimens CZ-Cl, Ct, and C3. Load applied 2 in. (one-third the

thickness) from one face. The loads are in kips per foot of actual width

of specimen. The deflections and sets are for a gage length of 7 ft 6 in. the gage length of the deflectometers.

[6]
The gage length of the compressometers was

8 ft 3% in. The shortenings and sets shown in figure 4 for a height of 8 ft were computed from

the vahies obtained from the compressometer

readings.

Under the maximum load the concrete on

each specimen crushed and spalled at the top of specimen on the face nearer the load line.

3. Transverse Load

The results are shown in table 4 and figure 6

for specimens CZ-Tl , T2, and T3.

Under the maximum load specimen Tl

ruptured transversely under a loading roller, specimen T2 at midspan, and T3 between the

loading rollers.

4. Impact Load

The results of the impact loads on wall

specimens CZ-Il , 12, and 13 ai-e shown in tiible 4 and figure 7. After the 10-ft drop the set in specimen

CZ-Il was 0.004 in., in 12 0.003 in., and in 13

0.001 in. No other effects were observed.

JOO

0.02 0.04 0.06

deflecH'on in. Figure 6. —Transverse load on wall CZ.

Load-deflection (open circles) and load-set (solid circles) results for specimens CZ-Tl, T2, and TS on the span 7 ft 0 in.

0 0.2 0.4 0.6

deflection in. Figure 7.

Impact load on wall CZ.

Height of drop-deflection (open circles) and height of drop-set (solid

circles) results for specimens CZ~II. IP., and 7.3 on the span 7 ft 6 in.

5. Concentrated Load

Wall specimen CZ-P3 under concentrated

load is shown on the right in figure 8. Tlie

results of the concentrated loads on wall speci- mens CZ-Pl, P2, and PS are shown in table 4

and figure 9

.

The concentrated loads were applied to one

face only. The set after a load of 1,000 lb. had been applied to specimens PI and P2 was

0.001 in. and to P3, 0.000 in. No other effects were observed.

6. Racking Load

The results of the racking load on wall

specimens CZ-Rl , R2, and R3 are shown in

table 4 and figure 10. After a load of 6.25 kips/ft had been applied,

the set in specimen CZ El was 0.002 in./8 ft and in specimen R2 0.004 in./8 ft. The racking specimens were built on the webs

of steel channels having the flanges down.

Under loads greater than 2.5 kips/ft the flanges

of the channel on which specimen R3 was built

spread suddenly. This occurred a number of times as the load was increased. The vibration

[7]
Figure 8.—Wall specimen CZ-P3 under concentrated load and specimen DA-Il during the impact test.

lOOO^o

SOO^

J 600^

03

400k

200k

0

0 0.02 0.04 0.06

indenfaiion in. Figure 9.'

Concentrated load on wall CZ.

Load-indentation (open circles) and load-set (solid circles) results for specimens CZ-Pl, P2, and PS.

2^

0 0.02 0.04 0.06

deformafion in./Sff

Figure 10.Racking load on wall CZ.

Load-deformation (open circles) and load-set (solid circles) results for specimens CZ-Rl, RZ, and RS. The loads are in kips per foot of actual width of specimen.

[8]
of the specimen whenever the flanges spread

changed the location of the deformeter relative

to the top of the specimen. Therefore, the

deformation and set could not be determined

from the readings of the dial micrometer.

VI. WALL PA

1. Description

Wall DA was a nonreinforced monolithic

concrete wall. The concrete consisted of 1 part of Portland cement, 2.53 parts of sand, and

3.41 parts of gravel, by dry weight. The only

difference in these specimens and specimens CZ

was in the proportions of the concrete. Each

face was concrete as poured.

The price of this construction in Washington,

D. C, as of July 1937, was $0.32/ft2.

(a) Four-Foot Wall Specimens

Wall specimen DA, shown in figure 2, was 8

ft 3}^ in. high, 4 ft OKe in. wide, and G}i in. thick. Concrete.—The concrete was transit-mixed

and consisted of 1 part of portland cement,

2.53 parts of sand, and 3.41 parts of gravel, by

dry weight; or 1 part of portland cement, 2.8 parts of damp sand, and 3.2 parts of damp

gravel, by loose volume.

Table 5.Physical properties of the concrete, wall DA

[The weight of the concrete, aee either 28 or 29 days, based on the volume

of the walls, was 148 Ih/tt']

Specimen

a.

C3

TlT2

TS

II72

13RlR3

Average

Water,

per sack

of cement

gal

7.

1

7. 1

7. 1 7.1

7.2 7.2

5.2 5.2

a. 2 7.3

7. 1

6. 7

Slump

6h

6W

6

4

Compressive strength age 28 or 29 days

Cylinders cured with

wall speci- mens

lb/in.'' 3,010

2, 7B0

2, 450

2, 300

1,920

1,800 2,890

2, 740

3, 1.50

3, 1.30

1, 760

1, 460

2, 450

Cylinders cured at 70^F. and

95 to 100%

relative humidity

3, 800

3, 7111

4, 200

3, 910

3, 250

3, 180

4, 330

4, 430

4, 160

3, 960

3, 100

2. 600

3, 720

For each specimen the slump was determined

in accordance with AST^M Tentative Standard

D138-32 T, Methods of Test for Consistency

of Portland Cement Concrcle. Two 0- ])y ]2-

in. cylinders were made from the same concrete

as for each specimen. One cylinder was stored near the wall specimens and the other at 70°F

and a relative humidity of 95 to 100 percent.

The compressive strength of each cylinder was

determined on the day the corresponding wall

specimen was tested, age cither 28 or 29 days.

The physical properties of the concrete are given in table 5.

(6) Eight-Foot Wall Specimens

The 8-ft wall specimens, shown in figure 3, were 8 ft 3% in. high, 8 ft 0% in. wide and 6 Kg

in. thick. The specimens were similar to the

4-ft specimens.

Figure 11.—Wall specimen DA-C3 under compressive

load.

[9]
100

Co

1 9-»1 •-J

»

—oc^-o- /

-o

/

/

»

c <J-o

S — ooi

/

/ —OOfO—

0

/ •«3 <A—

/

C

/ •«

/

0^ 0 0.04 008

shortening in./S ft

Figure 12.Compressive load on wall DA.

Load-shortening (open circles) and load-set (solid circles) results for specimens DA-Cl, C2, and CS. Load applied 2 in. (one-third the

thickness) from one face. The loads are in kips per foot of actual width of specimen.

2. Compressive Load

Wall specimen DA-C3 under compressive

load is shown in figure 11. The results for wall specimens DA-Cl, C2, and C3 are shown

in table 4 and in figures 12 and 13. The gage length of the compressometers was

8 ft 3%6 in. The shortenings and sets shown

in figure 12 for a height of 8 ft were computed

from the values obtained from the compressometer readings.

Under the maximum load specimen DA-Cl

collapsed suddenly and specimens C2 and C3

crushed and spalled at the top of the specimen on the face nearer the load line.

3. Transverse Load

Wall specimen DA-Tl under transverse load

is shown in figure 14. The results for specimens

DA-Tl, T2, and T3 arc given in table 4 and

figure 15. Under the maximum load each specimen

ruptured transversely between the loading

rollers.

4. Impact Load

Wall specimen DA-Il during the impact

test is sho\vn in figure 8. The results for specimens DA-Il, 12, and 13 are shown in

table 4 and in figure 16. After the 10-ft drop the set in each specimen was 0.003 in. No other effects were observed.

5. Concentrated Load

The results on specimens DA-PI, P2, and P3

are shown in table 4 and figure 17. The concentrated loads were applied to one

face. The set after a load of 1,000 lb had been

applied was 0.001 in. for specimen PI, 0.004

in. for P2, and 0.003 in. for P3.

6. Racking Load

Wall specimen DA-B2 under racking load is shown in figure 18. The results for specimens

DA-Rl, R2, and R3 are shown in table 4 and

figure 19. After a load of 6.25 kips/ft had been

applied, the set in specimen DA-Rl was 0.001

in./8 ft, in R2 0.002 in./8 ft, and in R3 0.003

in./S ft. No other effects were observed.

0 0.02 0.04 0.06

lateral deflection in. Figure 13.

Com-pressive load on wall DA.

Load-lateral deflection (open circles) and load-lateral set (solid circles) results for specimens DA-Cl, C2, and CS. Load applied 2 in. (one- third the thickness) from one face. The loads are in kips per foot of actual width of specimen. The deflections and sets are for a gage length of V ft 6 In., the gage length of the deflectometers.

[10]
VII. COMMENTS

The two concrete mixtures in wall constructions CZ and DA differed with respect to cement

content and ratio of fine to coarse aggregates.

The slumps were nearly equal and the watercement ratios (7.25 and 6.67 gallons per sack,

respectively) were not very difl'erent. The

concrete wall (1:3:5 mixture by volume of

Portland cement, loose sand, and loose gravel) was harsh and, in spite of the thorovigh rodding

of each 12-in. layer, there was some honeycombed concrete in most of the specimens, as

illustrated in figure 20. The concrete in wall

DA (1:2.8:3.2 mixture by volume of portland

cement, loose sand, and loose gravel) did not

segregate as readily as that for wall CZ and

appeared to require less work for compacting.

No honeycombed concrete was observed in

the specimens.

At the same age, 28 days, the average compressive strength (pounds per square inch) of the wall specimens CZ was approximately the same as the average compressive strength of

the corresponding 6- by 12-in. concrete cylinders

cured with the wall specimens. There is the same relation between the wall specimens DA

and the corresponding concrete cylinders.

Despite the greater compressive strengths of the

cylinders of the richer concrete (DA), the aver-

[11]
JOO

^oo

I

I

^ fOO

0

• D

• o

• '

/

i

' LOB

<» p

i

OA 0 O.OZ 0.04 0.06

deflection in. Figure 15.—Transverse load on wall DA.

Load-deflection (open circles) and load-set (solid circles) results for specimens DA-Tl, T2, and TS on tlie span 7 ft G in.

'^0 0.2 0.4 0.6

deflection in. Figure 16.

Impact load on wall DA.

Height of drop-deflection (open circles) and height of drop-set {solid

circles) results fur specimens DA-II. IS, and 13 on the sfian 7 f( r. in.

/OOO^

soo*^

§ 600^

CO) ^ 400^

\>o 200^

0.

Figure 17.-

0.02 0.04 0.06

indentation in. -Concentrated load on wall DA.

Load-indentation (open circles) and load-set (solid circles) results for specimen DA-PI, P2, and P.J. Figure 18. —Wall specimen DA-R2 under racking load.

12
age transverse strengths of the CZ specimens

containmg the leaner concrete was about 9

percent more than for specimens DA. The

concrete for both constructions was compacted more carefully than would often be the case m

constructing foundation walls for low-cost

housing. The harshness of the leaner mixture

and the presence of scattered small volumes of

0

o.o^ 0.04 0.06

deformation in/dff

Figure 19.Racking load on wall DA.

Load-deformation (opt-u circles) and load-set (solid circles) results for specimens DA-Rl, R2, and S3. The loads are in kips per foot of actual width of specimen. honeycombed concrete in waUs CZ indicate

that if a less effective method of compacting

had been used the results would not have been

so favorable for these waUs.

In applying the results of these tests to construction where the workmanship may not

always be as careful, it is well to bear in mind,

also, the marked influence on transverse strength of the presence of horizontal construction joints.-

The drawings of the specimens were pre- pared by E. J. Schell and G. W. Shaw, of the

2 See footnote 1.

Figure 20.I II ast ration of honeycombed concrete in

wall specimens CZ.

Building Practice and Specifications Section of

this Bureau, under the supervision of V. B.

Phelan.

The structm-al properties Avere determined by

the Engineering Mechanics Section, under the

supervision of H. L. Whittcmore and A. H.

Stang, and the physical properties of the

concrete by the Masonry Construction Section,

under the supervision of D. E. Parsons. They

were assisted by the following members of the

professional staft': E. S. Cohen, A. H. Easton,

C. C. Fishburn, A. Heiter, D. C. List, M. F. Peck, P. H. Petersen, L. R. Sweetman, and

H. L. Weiss.

Washington, AIay 20, 1940.

o

[13]

BUILDING MATERIALS AND STRUCTURES REPORTS

On request, the Superintendent of Documents, U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D. C, will place your name on a special mailing list to receive notices of new reports in this

series as soon as they are issued. There will be no charge for receiving such notices. An alternative method is to deposit with the Superintendent of Documents the sum of $5,

with the request that the reports be sent to you as soon as issued, and that the cost thereof be charged against your deposit. This will provide for the mailing of the publications without

delay. You will be notified when the amount of your deposit has become exhausted.

If 100 copies or more of any paper are ordered at one time, a discount of 25 percent is allowed. Send all orders and remittances to the Superintendent of Documents, U. S. Government Printing

Office, Washington, D. C.

The following publications in this series are available by purchase from the

Superintendent of Documents at the prices indicated

BMSl Research on Building Materials and Structures for Use in Low-Cost Housing 10^ BMS2 Methods of Determining the Structural Properties of Low-Cost House Constructions __ 100 BMS3 Suitability of Fiber Insulating Lath as a Plaster Base 10^ BMS4 Accelerated Aging of Fiber Building Boards 100 BMS5 Structural Properties of Six Masonry Wall Constructions 150 BMS6 Survey of Roofing Materials in the Southeastern States 150 BMS7 Water Permeability of Masonry Walls 100 BMS8 Methods of Investigation of Surface Treatment for Corrosion Protection of Steel 100 BMS9 Structural Properties of the Insulated Steel Construction Company's "Frameless-Steel" Constructions for Walls, Partitions, Floors, and Roofs 100 BMSIO Structural Properties of One of the "Keystone Beam Steel Floor" Constructions Sponsored by the H. H. Robertson Co 100 BMSll Structural Properties of the Curren Fabrihome Corporation's "Fabrihome" Constructions for Walls and Partitions 100 BMS12 Structural Properties of "Steelox" Constructions for Walls, Partitions, Floors, and Roofs

Sponsored by Steel Buildings, Inc 150 BMS13 Properties of Some Fiber Building Boards of Current Manufacture 100 BMS14 Indentation and Recovery of Low-Cost Floor Coverings 100 BMS15 Structural Properties of "Wheeling Long-Span Steel Floor" Construction Sponsored by

Wheeling Corrugating Co 100 BMS16 Structural Properties of a "Tilecrete" Floor Construction Sponsored by Tilecrete Floors, Inc 100 BMS17 Sound Insulation of Wall and Floor Constructions 100 BMS18 Structural Properties of "Pre-Fab" Constructions for Walls, Partitions, and Floors Sponsored by the Harnischfeger Corporation 100 BMS19 Preparation and Revision of Building Codes 150 BMS20 Structural Properties of "Twachtman" Constructions for Walls and Floors Sponsored by

Connecticut Pre-Cast Buildings Corporation 100 BMS21 Structural Properties of a Concrete-Block Cavity-Wall Construction Sponsored by the National Concrete Masonry Association 100 BMS22 Structural Properties of "Dun-Ti-Stone" Wall Construction Sponsored by the W. E. Dunn Manufacturing Co 100 BMS23 Structural Properties of a Brick Cavity-Wall Construction Sponsored by the Brick

Manufacturers Association of New York, Inc 100 BMS24 Structural Properties of a Reinforced-Brick Wall Construction and a Brick-Tile CavityWall Construction Sponsored by the Structural Clay Products Institute 100 BMS25 Structural Properties of Conventional Wood-Frame Constructions for Walls, Partitions,

Floors, and Roofs 150 BMS26 Structural Properties of "Nelson Pre-Cast Concrete Foundation" Wall Construction

Sponsored by the Nelson Cement Stone Co., Inc 100 BMS27 Structural Properties of "Bender Steel Home" Wall Construction Sponsored by The

Bender Body Co 100 BMS28 Backflow Prevention in Over-Rim Water Supplies 100

[List continued on cover page iv]
BUILDING MATERIALS AND STRUCTURES REPORTS

[ Continued from cover page in ] BMS29 Survey of Roofing Materials in the Northeastern States 10^ BMS30 Structural Properties of a Wood-Frame Wall Construction Sponsored by the Douglas

Fir Plywood Association 10^ BMS31 Structural Properties of "Insulite" Wall and "Insulite" Partition Constructions Sponsored by The Insulite Co 150 BMS32 Structural Properties of Two Brick-Concrete-Block Wall Constructions and a Concrete- Block Wall Construction Sponsored by the National Concrete Masonry Association. 100 BMS33 Plastic Calking Materials 10(4 BMS34 Performance Test of Floor Coverings for Low-Cost Housing: Part 1 100 BMS35 Stability of Sheathing Papers as Determined by Accelerated Aging 100 BMS36 Structural Properties of Wood-Frame Wall, Partition, Floor, and Roof Constructions

with "Red Stripe" Lath Sponsored by The Weston Paper and Manufacturing Co__ 100 BMS37 Structural Properties of "Palisade Homes" Constructions for Walls, Partitions, and

Floors Sponsored by Palisade Homes 100 BMS38 Structural Properties of Two "Dunstone" Wall Constructions Sponsored by the W. E. Dunn Manufacturing Co . 100 BMS39 Structural Properties of a Wall Construction of "Pfeifer Units" Sponsored by the Wisconsin Units Co 100 BMS40 Structural Properties of a Wall Construction of "Knap Concrete Wall Units" Sponsored

by Knap America Inc 100 BMS41 Effect of Heating and Cooling on the Permeability of Masonry Walls 100 BMS42 Structural Properties of Wood-Frame Wall and Partition Constructions With "Celotex"

Insulating Boards Sponsored by The Celotex Corporation 100 BMS43 Performance Test of Floor Coverings for Use in Low-Cost Housing: Part 2 100 BMS44 Surface Treatment of Steel Prior to Painting 100 BMS45 Air Infiltration Through Windows 100 BMS46 Structural Properties of "Scot-Bilt" Prefabricated Sheet-Steel Constructions for Walls,

Floors, and Roofs Sponsored by the Globe-Wernicke Co 100 BMS47 Structural Properties of Prefabricated Wood-Frame Constructions for Walls, Partitions, and Floors Sponsored by American Houses, Inc 100 BMS48 Structural Properties of "Precision-Built" Frame Wall and Partition Constructions

Sponsored by the Homasote Co 100 BMS49 Metallic Roofing for Low-Cost House Construction 100 BMS50 Stabihty of Fiber Building Boards as Determined by Accelerated Aging 100 BMS51 Structural Properties of "Tilecrete Type A" Floor Construction Sponsored by the

Tilecrete Corporation 100 BMS52 Effect of Ceiling Insulation Upon Summer Comfort 100 BMS53 Structural Properties of a Wall Construction of "Munlock Dry Wall Brick," Sponsored

by the Munlock Engineering Co 100 BMS54 Effect of Soot on the Rating of an Oil-Fired Heating Boiler 100 BMS55 Effects of Wetting and Drying on the Permeability of Masonry Walls 100 BMS56 A Survey of Humidities in Residences 100 BMS57 Roofing in the United States; Results of a Questionnaire 100 BMS58 Strength of Soft-Soldered Joints in Copper Tubing 100 BMS59 Properties of Adhesives for Floor Coverings ^ 100 BMS61 Structural Properties of Two Nonreinforced Monolithic Concrete Wall Constructions.. 100