U. S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
D. C, will place your name on a special mailing list to receive notices of new reports in this

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 report 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 100 BMS2 Methods of Determining the Structural Properties of Low-Cost House Constructions. _ 10^ BMS3 Suitability of Fiber Insulating Lath as a Plaster Base 10^ BMS4 Accelerated Aging of Fiber Building Boards 10^ 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 Co.'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

the 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 Supplement to BMS17, Sound Insulation of Wall and Floor Constructions 50 BMS18 Structural Properties of "Pre^^Fab" Constructions for WaUs, 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" WaU 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 BMS29 Survey of Roofing Materials in the Northeastern States 100 BMS30 Structural Properties of a Wood-Frame Wall Construction Sponsored by the Douglas

Fir Plywood Association 100

List continued on cover page III]
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE • Jesse H. Jones, Secretary

NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS • Lyman J. Briggs, Director

BUILDING MATERIALS

and STRUCTURES

REPORT BMS86

Structural, Heat-Transfer, and Water-Permeability

Properties of "Speedbrik" Wall Construction

Sponsored by thx General Shale Products Corporation

by MAHLON F. PECK, VINCENT B. PHELAN, RICHARD S. DILL

and PERRY H. PETERSEN

ISSUED JULY 15, 1942

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

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

UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE • WASHINGTON • I942

FOB. SALE BY THE SUPERINTENDENT OF DOCUMENTS, WASHINGTON, D. C. • PRICE I5 CENTS
Foreword

This report is one of a series issued by the National Bureau of Standards on the

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 the program outlined in BMS2. The sponsor, therefore, is responsible for the design of the construction 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 the load-deformation relations and strength of the structural

elements submitted when subjected to compressive, transverse, concentrated, impact,

and racking loads; heat-transfer coefficients determined in a shielded hot-box heattransfer apparatus; and water-permeability values obtained by tests under conditions

that simulated exposure to a heavy wind-driven rain.

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.

[n]
Structural, Heat-Transfer, and Water-Permeability Properties of

"Speedbrik" Wall Construction Sponsored by the General Shale

Products Corporation

by MAHLON F. PECK, VINCENT P. PHELAN, RICHARD S. DILL,

and PERRY H. PETERSEN

CONTENTS

Page

Foreword i ii

I. Introduction 1 II. Sponsor and product 2

III. Specimens and tests 2

1. Structural 2

2. Heat-transfer 4

3. Water-permeability 4

IV. Structural properties 4

1. Materials 4

(a) Masonry units " 4

(b) Mortar 5

(1) Cement 5

(2) Lime 5

(3) Sand 5

(4) Mix 5

(c) Fabrication data 6

2. Sponsor's statement 6

(a) Description of specimens, wall DP 6

(1) Four-foot specimens 6

(2) Eight-foot specimens 6

Page IV. Structural properties—Continued.

3. Compressive load ^ 6

4. Transverse load 8

5. Concentrated load 8

6. Impact load 9

7. Racking load 10

V. Heat-transfer properties 11

VI. Water-permeability properties 13

1. Materials 13

(a) Masonry units 13

(b) Mortar 13

2. Description of specimens 15

3. Test procedure 15

4. Test results 15 VII. Comments 16

ABSTRACT

For the program on the investigation of low-cost house constructions, specimens representing "Speedbrik" masonry wall construction were submitted by

the General Shale Products Corporation. These speci- mens were subjected to structural, heat-transfer, and

water-permeability tests. The structural specimens were subjected to compressive, transverse, concentrated, impact, and racking loads, for each of which three like specimens were

tested. The transverse, concentrated, and impact

loads were applied to the inside face of the specimens.

The deformation under load and the set after the

load was removed were measured for each increment

of load. Heat-transfer properties of two specimens were

determined in a shielded hot-box heat-transfer apparatus.

Nine water-permeability specimens were tested under conditions that simulated exposure to a heavj'

wind-driven rain.

1. INTEODUCTION

To provitle technical facts on the performance

of constructions for low-cost houses, to discover

promising new constructions, and ultimately to determine the properties necessary for acceptable performance in actual service, the National

Bureau of Standards has 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

vStructures for Use in Low-Cost Housing.

To determine the strength of house constructions in the laboratory, standardized metliods were developed for applying loads to portions

of a completed house. Included in this study were masomy and wood-frame constructions of

[1]
types whicli have been extensively used in this countty for houses and whose behavior under

widely different set-vice conditions is well laiown

to builders and the piiblic. 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, Pai-ti- tjons, Floors, and Roofs. The masonry speci- mens were built by the Masonry Construction

Section of this Bui-eau, and the wood-fi-ame

specimens were biiilt and tested by the Forest

Products Laboratory at Madison, Wis.

This report describes the structm-al, heattransfer, and water-permeability properties of a

wall construction sponsored by one of the

manufacturers in the biiilding industry. The

str\!ctural specimens were subjected to coni-

])ressive, transverse, concentrated, impact, and

racking loads, simidating- the loads to which tlie walls of a house are subjected. In actual service, compressive loads on a wall

are produced by the weight of the roof, second

floor, and second-story walls, if any; by furnitirre and occupants; and by snow and wind

loads on the roof. Transverse loads on a wall

are produced by wind, concentrated and impact loads by accidental contact with heavy

objects, and racking loads by the action of the

wind on adjoining walls. The deflection and set under each increment

of load were measured, because the suitability

of a construction depends not only on its resist- ance to deformation when loads are applied

but also on its ability to return to its original

size and shape when the loads are removed.

Two specimens were subjected to heattransfer tests, during which the temperature of

the air near the outside surface was maintained

at 0° F and that near the inside surface at 70°

F to simulate conditions which might exist in actual service.

Nine specimens were exposed in the waterpermeability test chamber to conditions similar

to a heavy wind-driven rain.

II. SPONSOR AND PRODUCT

The specimens were submitted by the General Shale Products Corporation, Kingsport,

Tenn., with the cooperation of the Structural

Clay Products Institute and the Speedbrik

Corporation, and represented a masonry wall

construction of "SpeedbrUv" units.

Ill SPECIMENS AND TESTS

1. Structural

The wall construction for the structuralproperty tests was assigned the symbol DP,

and the individual specimens were assigned the

designations given in table 1.

Table 1.Specimen designations, ivall DP

Specimen designation Load Load applied

CI, C2, CS . 77, Tf, rs . H1,P2,PS''

II. 12, IS.. Rl, R2, RS

Compressive

Transverse Concentrated Impact

Racking

Upper end.

Inside face. Do. Do. Near upper end.

" The transverse and concentrated loads were applied to the same

specimens, the transverse loads first.

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

report also gives the I'equirements for speci- mens and describes the presentation of the re- sults of the tests, particularly the load-deformation graphs.

For the transverse, concentrated, and impact

loads there were only three specimens for each

load, not six as required by BMS2. This construction was symmetrical about a plane midway between the faces, except that there was

a shallow groove in the outside face filled with

mortar and the mortar joints on the outside

face were tooled ; therefore the results for loads

applied to one face of the specimen were as- sumed to be practically the same as those for loads applied to the other face. Under compressive load the shortenings and

sets were measured with compressometers at- tached to the steel plates through which the

load was applied, not attached to the specimen

as described in BMS2.

Lateral deflections under compressive and

transverse loads were measured with a deflecto- meter of fixed gage length, which consisted of a light (dui'alumin) tubular frame having a leg at one end and a hinged plate at the other.

The deflectometer was attached near the upper

end of a face of the specimen by clamping the
Figure 1.

Apparatus for concentrated-load test. A, specimen; B, hydraulic jaek; C, ring dynanionieler; D, beam; E. steel liisk; F, dial micrometer.

hinged plate. The gage length (distance between points of support) was 7 ft. 6 in. A dial

micrometer was attached to the frame at midlength, with its spindle in contact with the

specimen. The dial was graduated to 0.001

in., and readings were recorded to the nearest

division. Two defiectometers were attached to the specimen, one near each edge. This method

of measurement was used instead of the taut- wire mirror-scale device described in BMS2.

The indentation under concentrated load

and the set after the load was removed were

measured, not tlie set only, as described in BMS2. The apparatus is shown in figure 1. Specimen A was vertical, as for the transverse

test. The load was applied by a jack, B,

through a ring dynamometer (load-measin-ing

device), C, to a freely movable steel beam, D,

to which were attached a thick steel disk, J£, and two dial micrometers, F. One end of the

disk and the spindles of the micrometers were

in contact with the face of the specimen. The

distcince between the spindles was 16 in. The

dials were graduated to 0.001 in., and readings

[3]
were recorded to the nearest tenth of a division.

A small initial load was applied to prevent

shifting of the disk, and the average of the

micrometer readings was taken as the mitial

reading. Greater loads were applied, 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 reduced to the mitial value was determmed

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

braced to form a rigid connection. The channel rested on two steel plates, % in. thick and 4

in. square, on top of the specimen, with the

steel angle extending downward in the plane of the specimen. A dial micrometer was attached

to the lower end of the angle, its spindle being

in contact with the edge of the specimen. The

gage length (distance from the top of the specimen to the spindle) was 6 ft. 11 in. The dial 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 device described m BMS2.

The tests were begun May 14, 1941, and

completed May 28, 1941. With one exception,

the specimens were tested on the 28th day after they were built. Compressive specimen C3

was tested on the 29th day. The sponsor's

representative witnessed the tests.

2. Heat-Transfer

The specimens for the determination of the

heat-transfer properties were assigned the symbols HT51 and HT.52.

The heat-transfer properties were determined

by the shielded hot-box method. The tests were begun May 26, 1941, and completed June

6, 1941. Specimens HT51 and HT62 were

tested 34 and 39 days, respectively, after being

built.

3. Water-Permeability

Three of the nine water-permeability speci- mens were similar to structural specimens DP,

and all were aged at least 1 month before being

tested. The other six specimens were constructed in January 1939, five of which were of

8-in. units, and the sixth was of 4- and S-in. units arranged to form a specimen 12 in. thick.

The units were manufactured by the Claycroft Co., Columbus, Ohio, and the General

Shale Products Co., Kingsport, Tenn. Three

different mortars were used, but the workmanship, test procedure, and method of rating were

the same m all specimens.

IV. STRUCTURAL PROPERTIES

1. Materials

Unless otherwise stated, the information on

materials was obtained from the sponsor and

by inspection of the specimens. The Masonry

Construction Section of the National Bureau of Standards determined the physical properties

of the masonry units and the mortar and obtained the fabrication data.

(a) Masonry Units

Side-cut shale units. The nominal dimensions of the units shown in figure 2 were 5% in. thick, 11 v\. wide, and 2% in. long. They

were of double-shell construction with six major cells. On the face of the unit a groove

% in. wide by % in. deep gave the appearance of Flemish bond to the wall after the groove had

been filled with moi'tar.

The nommal dimensions of the half units were 5% in. thick, 6 in. wide, and 2% in. long. They

were like full-sized units divided at mid width.

The physical properties of the units are given

in table 2.

Table 2.

Physical properties of masonry units, wall DP

Property Unit Half unit

Average dimensions: Thickness, .... . - . -in. 5. 72 5. 72 Width .in n. 95 5. 84 Length ..in.. 2. 73 2. 74 Over-al! thickness of outer shell.

.

in.- L62 L58

Average dry weight lb. 9.09 4. 39 Absorption: By total immersion:

5-hr cold. % by dry weight. - 2,8 2.9

24-hr cold, C % by dry weight.. 3.4 3. 3 5-hr boil, B % by dry weight.. 7.0 6. 6 By partial immersion: » When laid g/30in.2.. 2L0

Saturation coefficient, C/B. . 0.49 0. 53 Compressive strength: Net area .. .. .. lb/in.2.. 9, 420 9,900 Gross area ... . . lb/in.2.. 5, 860 6, 090

Tr{iii<^vprsp strength. Ifl-in. snan Ib/in.2 _ 1,465

• Immersed on fiat side in H in. of water for 1 minute.

[4]
Figure 2.

Masonry unit..

(b) Mortar

(1) Cement.—The cement was Green Bag

Portland Cement Co.'s "Green Bag" portland

cement. It complied with the requirements of

Federal Specification SS-C-191a for soundness,

time of set, fineness, and tensile strength.

(2) Lime.—The lime was M. J. Grove Co.'s "Frederick County Mason's Hydrated Lime."

The plasticity of the lime, determined in ac- cordance with Federal Specification SS-L-351, was 170.

(3) Sand.—The sand was Potomac River

building sand. The sieve analysis is given in table 3. Table 3.

Sieve analysis of the sand, wall DP

V. S. standard Sieve No.Passing, by

weight

Percent

8 100

16 100 30 86

50 47 100 16

(4) Mix.—The mortar proportions were, by

weight, 1 part of portland cement, 0.42 part of

hydrated lime, and 5.1 parts of dry sand; by

volume, 1 part of portland cement, 1 part of

hydrated lime, and 6 parts of loose, damp sand,

assuming that portland cement weighs 94 Ib/ft^, dry hydrated lime weighs 40 Ib/ft^, and that 80

lb of dry sand is equivalent to 1 ft ^ of loose,

(lamp sand. The materials for each batch of

mortar were measured by weight and mixed in a batch mixer having a capacity of % fV. The

amount of water added was adjusted to the

satisfaction of the mason and was 21.0 percent

of the dry materials, by weight.

Samples of the mortar were taken from at

least one batch for each wall, the flow before

and after suction was determined in accordance

with Federal Specification SS-C-181b, Cement;

Masonry, and six 2-in. cubes were made. The

average flow of the mortar was 120 percent, and

the ratio of the flow after suction to the initial flow was 65 percent. Three cubes were stored

in water at 70° F. and three stored in air near

the specimens. The strength of the mortar is given in table 4. Table 4.

Average compressive strength of mortar,

wall DP

[Determined on the day the corresponding wall specimen was tested]

Specimen

CIC2

C3

riT2

TS

//12

ISRlR2

RS

Average

Compressive strength Water storage Air storage

Ib/in.i Iblin.^ 900 435

840 480

800 505

975 645

790 455

900 610

1,015 650

870 455

840 470

855 610

835 605

785 390

720 380

760 330

730 305 840 490

5]
Figure 3.— Four-fool wall DP.

(c) Fabrication Data

Fabrication data, for wall DP are given m

table 5. Table 5.

Fabrication data, wall DP

[The values per square foot were computed using the face area of the specimens]

Joint thickness; Bed in- Head in. Masonry units No./ft-.. Portland cement Ib/ft^-. Lime hydrate lb/ft2_ Sand, dry lb/ft'- Mason's time: Laying units hr/ft2_ Pointing and tooling hr/ft'.. Total hr/ft2..

0. rvi

. 47

3. S9

1. 51

0. 635

7.71

0. 069

.013 .082

2. Sponsor's Statement

Wall DP was masonry built of cellular shale

units. The units and mortar were exposed on

both faces.

The price of this construction in Washington,

D. C, as of July 1937, was $0.35/ft^

(a) Description oj Specimens, Wall DP

(1) Four-foot specimens.—The average dimensions of the specimens which are shown in

figure 3 were: height, 8 ft 1% in.; width 4 ft 1% in. ; thickness, 5^^ in. There were 30 courses

of units in each 4-ft specimen, with 4 units, or the equivalent, in each course. The inside face of specimen DP-R3 during

construction is shown in figure 4. The units were di*y when received and were laid without

wetting. Mortar for the bed joint was placed

only on the front and back shells of the units,

for the head joints, the ends of the units were

buttered, and when laid the joint extended

only the thickness of the front and back shells. The grooved faces of the units were the outside

face of the specimen, which was plumbed.

The grooves were filled with mortar to give the

appearance of a joint, and all the joints were

tooled to a concave surface.

The outside face of the specimens had the

appearance of Flemish bond.

The specimens were built by an experienced mason

.

(2) Eight-foot specimens.—The 8-ft specimens, shown in figure 5, were similar to the

4-ft specimens. The average dimensions were: height 8 ft \% in.; width, 8 ft 2'yi6 in.; thickness, 5% in. There were 30 courses of units

in each 8-ft specimen, with 8 units, or the equivalent, in each course. Mortar was placed in the cells in one unit, or the equivalent, in one

end of the four upper courses and in the four

lower courses at the diagonally opposite corner. These cells were filled to prevent local crushing

where the racking load was applied and at the

stop.

3. Compressive Load

Specimen DP-C2 under compressive load is shown in figure 6. The results for specimens

DP-Cl, C2, and C3 are shown in table 6 and

in figures 7 and 8. The speed of the movable head of the testing

machine was adjusted to 0.044 in./min.

[6]
Figure 4.

Wall spechnen DP-R3

during construction.

Table 6.Structural properties, wall DP

[Weight, based on face area: 41.37 lb/ft ']

Compressive load Transverse load; span,

7 ft fi in. Concentrated load; disk, diam 1 in. Impact load; span, 7 ft 6 in.; sandbag, 60 lb Racking load

Specimen Maximum

load Specimen Maximum

load Specimen Maximum

load Specimen

Maximum

height of drop Specimen Maximum

load

CI

bKipslft

49. 33

41. 32

39. 86

Tl

lb/ft'26. 06

27. 18

23. 42

PI

lb

- 1. 000

' 1. COO

« 1, 000

/;

ft 1.0

1.0

1.5

Rl 3. 22

3. 57

3. 27 CS T2 P2 12 Re

C3 TS PS IS RS

Average 43.50 Average 25. 56 Average Average. „. Average. . » 1,000 1.2 3. 35

« Load applied 1.92 in. (one-third the thickness of the specimen) from

the inside face.

Under a load of 43 kips/ft on DP-Cl, vertical

cracks appeared in both edges of the specimen

in the foui" lower courses near midthiokness.

Under the maximum load, these cracks extended

one-fourth the height of the specimen. Vertical cracks appeared near midthickness in the

two upper com'ses of specimen CS under a load

b A kip is 1,000 lb.

° Test discontinued. Specimen undamaged.

of 28 kips/ft. Under the maximiun load on

specimens C2 and CS, the mortar spalled from

the bed joints on the upper half of the inside

face, Although no cracks were visible in specimen after test, removal of the upper

courses showed cracks in the webs of the three

upper com-ses.

463397°—42 2 [7]
Figure 5.

Eight-foot wall DP.

4. Transverse Load

Wall specimen DP-T2 under transverse load is shown in figure 9. The results for wall

specimens DP-Tl, T2, and T3 are shown in

table 6 and in figure 10. Under the maximum

load on each specimen, one bed joint near the

upper loading roller ruptured between the units

and the mortar, the crack extending the entu-e width and thickness of the specimen.

5. Concentrated Load

The results of the concentrated load on speci- mens DP-Pl, P2, and P3 are shown in table 6 and in figure 11. The load was applied to a unit near the center

of the specimen. The sets after a load of 1,000

lb had been applied to specimens PI, P2, and

P3 were 0.000, 0.009, and 0.001, respectively.

No other effects were observed.

[8]
Figure 6.—Wall specimen DP—C2 under compressive

load. A, corapressometer; B, deflectometer.

6. Impact Load

Specimen DP-Il chiring the impact test is shown in figm-e 12. The results of the impact

loads on specimens DP-Il, 12, and 13 are shown in table 6 and in figure 13. At a drop of 0.5 ft on specimens DP-Il and

12, a bed joint near midheight cracked between

the units and the mortar, beginning at the face

not loaded and extending the width of the specimen, but not through the thickness. Specimen 13 cracked in the same way at a drop of

1.0 ft. After the maximum height of drop,

the cracks extended through the eiitii-e thickness

of each specimen.

4:

35

JO

^5

^o

/5

/o

5

0

• o

• • o 0

0 0

/

,

• cp

• CD)

/ /

\I DP O .05 JO J5

3/horfen/ng /n/dft

Figure 7.

Compressive load on tvall DP.

Load-sliorti'iiing: (open circles) and load-set (solid circles) results for spceimcii - DP-CU C2. and C3. The load was applied 1.92 in. Cone-third the thiekiiess of the wall) from the inside face. The loads are in kips

per foot of actual width of specimen.

J5

30

^5

I

I

£0

/5

/O

5

O

• 0

• • o o

• • oo

• CD

f DP O .05 ./O ./5 /atera/ def/ect/on /n. Figure 8.

Compressive load on wall DP.

T-oad-lateral deflection (open circles) and load-lateral set (solid circles) results for specimens DP-Cl, C2, and C3. The load was applied 1.92

in. (one-third the thickness of the walll from the inside face. The

loads are in kips per foot of actual width of specimen. The deflections and sets are for a gage leugtli of 7 ft. 6 in., the gage length o f the

deflectometers.

[9]
^5

Figure 9.—Wall specimen DP-T2 under transverse load.

A. deflcctometer; B, ring dynamometer.

7. Racking Load

Wall specimen DP-RS under racking load is shown in figure 14. The results of the racking

loads on specimens DP-Rl , R2, and R3 are shown in table 6 and in figure 15. The racking load was applied to one edge of

each specimen at midthickness 6 in. below the

top. The stop was in contact with the edge of the specimen at the diagonally opposite corner. Under the maximum load on each specimen,

the bond between the units and the mortar

ruptui-ed in stepwise cracks through the bed

4

1

/5

5

.02 .04 .06

def/ecf/or? /n. Figure 10.

Transverse load on wall DP.

Load-deflection (open circles) and load-set (solid circles) results for specimens DP-Tl, T2, and T3 on the span 7 ft. 6 in.

^3

O

O .02 .04 .06

/nc/enfat/on //?. Figure 11.

Concentrated load on wall DP.

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

and head joints diagonally from the load to the

stop. The crack passed through several units

in each specimen.

[10]
Figure 12.—Wall specimen DP~I1

during the impact test.

A, gage for measurement of set.

I

JO

Z5

£0

/.5

/.O

.0.5

0

/

D

•o //

0

IC— —

c

/

DP

o 02 0.4 0.6 c/ef/ec^/on /n. Figure 13.

Impact load on wall DP.

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

circles) results lor specimens DP-11, 12, IS on the span 7 ft 6 in.

Specimen DP-R2 after test is shown in

figure 16.

V. HEAT-TRANSFER PROPERTIES

The heat-transfer specimens, HT61 and

HT52, were similar in constructicm to the

structm-al specimens. Specimen HT51 was

built of 8-in. units, not 6-in. units. This specimen, shown in figure 17, was 8 ft 1% in. high.

4 ft 7% in. wide, and 7% in. thiclv. Specunen HT52 was built of 6-in. units and was 8 ft 1% in. high, 4 ft 7%6 in. wide, and 5% in. thick.

The top of each specimen was finished with

a mortar cap to close the cells. The results of the heat-transfer tests arc presented in table 7. The transmittance {U)

of these specimens may be compared with the

value 0.50 given in the ASHVE Guide for

8-in. sohd brick walls, hard brick face, common

brick backing.

11 ]
Figure 14.—Wall specimen DF-R8

under racking load. A, deformeter.

Table 7.

Ileat-iransfer coefficients for walls HT61 and

HT52

3,0

Item

ObsiTvcrl thermal transmittance, M—.. Ciirrci'lcil I hernial transmittance, U"..

'I'lii'riiial enii.liielance, C

\\'ar]ii surlaee lilm coefBcient, ft Cold surface film coefficient, /o

HT52,

6-in. wall

0.36 0. 40

.42 .48

.61 .76

1.83 1.83

1.63 1. 59 Temperature averages: Warm side: Air

Surface Cold side: Air

Surface Temperature differences: Air to air Surface to surface Surface to air, warm..

Surface to air, cold . .

.

Mean of air temperatures. Mean wall temperature. . _

70. 5 70.3 56.7 .54. 7 +0.2 -1.

1

15.7 17. 1

70.3 71.3 41.0 37.6

13.8 15.6

15. 5 18.

1

35.3 34.6

35. 9

36. 2

^0

/.5

/.O

0.5

Note.—The definitions of m, V, and C, representing the variou^

coefficients of heat transmission, are as follows:

u, equals the number of Btu per hour transmitted through each square

foot of specimen for each degree F difference in temperature between the

air on the two sides, observed under test conditions. fequals u corrected for a 1.5-milc-per-hour wind outside and zero wind

inside by means of the factors./! = 1.65 and/o=6.00, taken from the ASHVE

Guide. C equals the number of Btu per hour transmitted through each square

foot of specimen for each degree F difference in temperature between the

surfaces of the two sides, observed under test conditions.

Figure 15.-

.0^ .04 .06

c/eforma/'/on /n./Sf/' -Racking load on wall DP.

Load-deformation (open circle.s) and load-set (solid circles) results for specimens DP-Rl, R2, and R3. The loads are in kips per foot of actual width of specimen.

[ 12 ]
Figure 16.

Wall specimen DP-R2 after racking test.

VI. WATER-PERAIEABILITY

PROPERTIES

1. Materials

(a) Masonry Units

The masonry units for water-permeability

specimens were in thicknesses of 4,6, and 8 in. The 6-in. specimens were constructed at the same time as the structural specimens. The 8- and 12-in. specimens were constructed in January 1939. The physical properties of the 8-m.

units are given in table 8.

Table 8.Phijsical properties of 8-in. units, waier-permeabil ity specimens

used

Property Ohio units

Average dimensions: Thickness in._ AVidth in._ Length in.- Average dry weight lb_. Absorption: By total immersion:

21-hr. cold. % by dry weight..

5-hr. boiling, B % by dry weight.. By partial immersion » g/30 in.2_. Saturation coefficient. C/B

Compvessive strength, _ _^ I'Vin.-

» Immersed on flat side in \i in. of water for 1 minute.

Greater than 6,500 Ib/in.^.

{h) Mortar

The water-permeability specimens were bonded with tlu'ee different mortars, desiu13
Figure. 17

Heat-transfer wall HT51.

HT5I

iiated as 7, 8, and 12. Mortars 7 and 8 contained Portland cement, lime, limestone dust,

and sand. Mortar 12 contained no limestone

dust and was the same as for the structural and

heat-transfer specimens.

Table 9.Physical properties of mortar, water-permeability specimens

The cement and lime combinations are indicated in table 9. The limestone dust was H. T. Campbell Sons Co.'s "Cameline Brand," and

the sand for mortal's 7 and 8 was Potomac

River building sand. The sieve analysis is given in table 10.

Mortar

Portland cement Lime

Water

content, by

weight of materials

Average

initial flow Water

retentivity Number Proportions

7: By volume By weight .

8: By volume By weight12: 'By volume By weight ... .

1 :0.3 :0.15 : 3.4

1 : 0.13 : 0.13 : 2.9

1:1.0:0.6:5.9 _ 1 : 0.42 : 0.51 : 5.1

1 : 1.0 : 0.0 : 6.0

1 : 0.42: 0.0 6.1

|"Medusa" waterproof- - -

1" Medusa" waterproof

|"Greenbag"- . . .

"Standard" dry hydrate _

"Washington" putty i>___

"Grove's" dry hydrate. . _

Percent

19. 5

21. 5

21. 1

Pe) cent110

97

119

Perce lU 60

89

64

» These proportions represent portlaud cement, lime, limestone dust, and sand, respectively.

•> Slaked powdered quicklime.

0 Mortar 12 contained no limestone dust.

[14]
Table 10.

Sieve analysis of the sand, waier-permeability

specimens

V. s. Passing, standard by

Sieve No. weight

Percent

8 ino

Hi 9(1 30 73 50 18 100 2

2. Description of Specimens

The wa tor-permeability specimens were about

50 in. high, 42 in. wide, and 6, 8, or 12 in. thick,

depending on the imits in the specimen. They

were supported on a single course of common

brick resting on a steel channel. The brick

course contained a copper flashing so that water

penetrating the specimen could be collected and

the rate of flow measured.

Except for dift'erences in dimensions of units

and specimens, the water-permeability and

structural specimens were constructed in the same manner; they were aged at least 1 month

before being tested.

3. Test Proceditre

The water-permeability test is described in BMS7, Water-Permeability of Masonry Walls,

as the "heavy rain test." The specimens were

supported on metal skids and clamped into position so that the exposed face foi'med one side of a pressure chamber. An air pressure of 10 Ib/ft^ above atmospheric was maintained in the chamber, and water from a perforated tube was

sprayed at the top of the exposed face at the

rate of 40 gal/hr for the duration of the test. Continual observations were made for about

2 hours after starting the test, after which the

observer inspected the specimens at frequent

intervals.

The following observations were made during

the test: Time required for the appearance of moisture (dampness) and of visible water on

the back of a specimen above the flashings;

time required for the leakage of water from the

flashing at the back of a specimen and the maximum rate of leakage; extent of damp area on

the back, including that due to the capfllary

rise of moisture from water on the flashings.

The ratings of performance are arbitrary and

are based on the assumption that visible water.

extensive damp areas on the back, oi' leakage

thi-ough a wall would damage plaster applied

directly to the wall or would injure the finished

interior of a building. The following ratings were applied:

Excellent (E): No visible water on back of specimen (above the flashings) in 1 day. No

leaks and not more than 25 percent of face area damp in 5 days. (A leak is defined as a flow

of water fi-om the flashings of 0.05 liter/hr or more.)

,

Good (G): No visible water on back of specimen in 1 day. No leaks and less than 50 per- cent of face area damp in 1 day.

Fair (F): Visible water on back of specimen

in more than 3 hours or less than 24 hours.

Maximum rate of leakage less tlian 1 liter/hi- in

1 day.

Poor (P): Visible water on back of specimen

in 3 hours or less. Maximum rate of leakag(>

less than 5 liters/hr in 1 day.

Very poor (VP): Maximum rate of leakage 5

liters/hr or more in 1 day.

4. Test Kesitlts

Data obtained from the water-permeability

tests are given in table 11. All the walls failed by water penetrating the face, dropping through

the vertical cells of the units, and coming

through the back of the specimen at the flashing, where it was measured.

Table 11.Water-permeability test data

Source of unit

OhioDo

Tennessee Do

Do

DoDo

DoDo

Speci- men

thick- ness

In.

Mortar No.

Time to failure as indi- cated by

Dampness »

b 39±6

6.4

5.4

2.4 0.2

1.8

Visible water «

Hr

Leak

Hr

>> 18±3

0. 5

.4

.3

.5

2.7

0.8

4.3

Maxi- mum

rate

of leak- age

Liters/ hour

0.02

. 25

. 9

2. 4 0.8

0.7

2.8 0.4

Area damp

in 1 day

Percent

0

0

4

5

4

Rating

» A dash indicates wall did not fail in this manner.

•"The uncertainty of the observation is given only if it exceeds 10 per- cent of the total elapsed time. The 6-in. walls had considerable dampness on

the back, whereas walls of similar 8-in. units had

only about one-twelfth the damp area. The

[15]
Figure 18.

Typical details oj a house of "Speedbrik" units.

8-in. walls made of Ohio units were less permeable than the 8-in. walls of Tennessee units,

probably clue to the fact that the Ohio units

had a lower brick suction (absorption) and were

laid with mortar of a higher water retentivity

.

VII. COMMENTS

"Speedbrik" units are available in thicknesses

of 3, 4, 6, and 8 in. Masonry cavity walls of greater thicknesses are built of combinations of

these four sizes. Special units are provided

to accommodate steel-sash frames. Closure

blocks are used for fillers around window and

door openings and water tables. The units are laid with the cells vertical to provide thermal insulation and resistance to moisture penetration.

Pointed false joints in grooves on the faces

of the units give the wall the appearance of

Flemish bond. Other styles of "Speedbrik"

have grooves in the face and one end of the

unit, so that other bonds may be imitated in a wall of single-unit thickness.

Plaster may be applied to the inside wall

siu-face with no lath or furrhig sti-ips.

16
Typical framing details are shown in figure 18. The drawings of the specimens were prepared

by E. J. Schell and G. W. Shaw, of the Building Practices and Specifications Section of

this Bureau, under the supervision of V. B. Phelan.

The physical properties of the units and the

mortar and the water-permeability properties

of the walls were determined by the Masonry

Construction Section, under the supervision of

D. E. Parsons.

The structural p]o])(^rties wci'c determined }>y

the Engineering Mechanics Section, under the

siipervision of H. L. Wliittemore.

The heat-transfei- properties of the specimens were determined by H. E. Robinson, of the

Heat Transfer Section, under the supervision

of R. S. Dill. The following members of the professional

staff assisted: E. S. Cohen, A. H. Easton, W. G.

Hoback, L. R. Sweetman, and H. L. Weiss.

Washington, May 8, 1942.

[17]

BUILDING MATERIALS AND STRUCTURES REPORTS

[Continued from cover page II] BMS31 Structural Properties of "Insulite" Wall and "Insulite" Partition Construction Sponsored by The Insulite Co 15^ BMS32 Structural Properties of Two Brick-Concrete-Block Wall Constructions and a Concrete- Block WaU Construction Sponsored by the National Concrete Masonry Association. lOfS BMS33 Plastic Calking Materials lOji BMS34 Performance Test of Floor Coverings for Use in Low-Cost Housing: Part 1 10^ BMS35 Stability of Sheathing Papers as Determined by Accelerated Aging 10^ BMS36 Structural Properties of Wood-Frame Wall, Partition, Floor, and Roof Constructions

with "Red Stripe" Lath Sponsored by the Weston Paper and Manufacturing Co 10^ BMS37 Structural Properties of "Palisade Homes" Constructions for WaUs, Partitions, and

Floors, Sponsored by Palisade Homes lOji BMS38 Structural Properties of Two "Dunstone" Wall Constructions Sponsored by the W. E. Dunn Manufacturing Co lOfS BMS39 Structural Properties of a Wall Construction of "Pfeifer Units" Sponsored by the Wisconsin Units Co 10^ BMS40 Structural Properties of a Wall Construction of "Knap Concrete Wall Units" Sponsored

by Knap America, Inc 10^ BMS41 Effect of Heating and Cooling on the Permeability of Masonry Walls lOji BMS42 Structural Properties of Wood-Frame WaU and Partition Constructions with "Celotex"

Insulating Boards Sponsored by The Celotex Corporation 15?5 BMS43 Performance Test of Floor Coverings for Use in Low-Cost Housing: Part 2 10^ BMS44 Surface Treatment of Steel Prior to Painting 10^ BMS45 Air Infiltration Through Windows 10^ BMS46 Structural Properties of "Scot-Bilt" Prefabricated Sheet-Steel Constructions for Walls,

Floors, and Roofs Sponsored by The Globe-Wernicke Co 10^ BMS47 Structural Properties of Prefabricated Wood-Frame Constructions for WaUs, Partitions, and Floors Sponsored by American Houses, Inc 10^ BMS48 Structural Properties of "Precision-Built" Frame Wall and Partition Constructions

Sponsored by the Homasote Co lOfS BMS49 Metallic Roofing for Low-Cost House Construction 10^ BMS50 Stabihty of Fiber Building [Boards as Determined by Accelerated Aging 10^ BMS51 Structural Properties of "Tilecrete Type A" Floor Construction Sponsored by the

Tilecrete Corporation lOjiS BMS52 Effect of Ceiling Insulation upon Summer Comfort 10^ BMS53 Structural Properties of a Masonry Wall Construction of "Munlock Dry Wall Brick"

Sponsored by the Munlock Engineering Co 10^ BMS54 Effect of Soot on the Rating of an Oil-Fired Heating Boiler 10^ BMS55 Effects of Wetting and Drying on the Permeabihty of Masonry Walls 100 BMS56 A Survey of Himiidities in Residences 10^ BMS57 Roofing in the United States—Results of a Questionnaire 10^ BMS58 Strength of Soft-Soldered Joints in Copper Tubing 10^ BMS59 Properties of Adhesives for Floor Coverings 10^ BMS60 Strength, Absorption, and Resistance to Laboratory Freezing and Thawing of Building

Bricks Produced in the United States 15j5 BMS61 Structural Properties of Two Nonreinforced MonoUthic Concrete Wall Constructions. _ 100 BMS62 Structural Properties of a Precast Joist Concrete Floor Construction Sponsored by the Portland Cement Association 10^ BMS63 Moisture Condensation in Building Walls 10^ BMS64 Solar Heating of Various Surfaces 10^ BMS65 Methods of Estimating Loads in Plumbing Systems 10^ BMS66 Plumbing Manual 200 BMS67 Structural Properties of "Mu-Steel" Prefabricated Sheet-Steel Constructions for Walls,

Partitions, Floors, and Roofs Sponsored by Herman A. Mugler 15^ BMS68 Performance Test of Floor Coverings for Use in Low-Cost Housing: Part 3 15^ BMS69 Stability of Fiber Sheathing Boards as Determined by Accelerated Aging 10^ BMS70 Asphalt-Prepared Roll Roofings and Shingies.- 150 BMS71 Fire Tests of Wood and Metal Framed Partitions 10^ BMS72 Structural Properties of "Precision-Built, Jr." Prefabricated Wood-Frame Wall construction Sponsored by the Homasote Co lOjS BMS73 Indentation Characteristics of Floor Coverings 10^ BMS74 Structural and Heat-Transfer Properties of "U. S. S. Panelbilt" Prefabricated SheetSteel Constructions for WaUs, Partitions, and Roofs Sponsored by the Tennessee

Coal, Iron, and RaUroad Co 150 BMS75 Survey of Roofing Materials in the North Central States 15^ BMS76 Effect of Outdoor Exposure on the Water Permeability of Masonry WaUs 15^ BMS77 Properties and Performance of Fiber Tile Boards 10^ BMS78 Structural, Heat-Transfer, and Water-Permeability Properties of Five Earth-WaU Constructions 20^ BMS79 Water-Distributing Systems for BuUdings 15^ BMS80 Performance Tests of Floor Coverings for Use in Low-Cost Housing: Part 4 15^ BMS81 Field Inspectors' Check List for Building Construction, (cloth cover, 5 x 7^2 inches) 20^ BMS82 Water Permeability of WaUs Built of Masonry Units 200 BMS83 Strength of Sleeve Joints in Copper Tubing Made with Various Lead-Base Solders lOfi BMS84 Survey of Roofing Materials in the South Central States 15^ BMS85 Dimensional Changes of Floor Coverings with Changes in Relative Humidity and

Temperature 10^ BMS86 Structural, Heat-Transfer, and Water-Permeability Properties of "Speedbrik" WaU

Construction 150