U. S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

BUILDING

MATERIALS

AND

STRUCTURES

REPORT BMS42

Structural Properties

of Wood-Frame Wall and

Partition Constructions With

"Celotex" Insulating Boards

Sponsored by

The Celotex Corporation

by

HERBERT L. WHITTEMORE

and AMBROSE H. STANG

with the collaboration of

Thomas R. C. Wilson

Forest Products Laboratory

^1

NATIONAL

BUREAU OF STANDARDS
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 Government agencies concerned with

housing construction and finance, which is cooperating in the iQvestigations through a subcommittee of principal technical assistants.

CENTRAL HOUSING COMMITTEE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON TECHNICAL RESEARCH

Walter Junge, Chairman. A. C. Shire, Vice Chairman.

Federal Housing Administration. United States Housing Authority.

Sterling R. March, Secretary.

Albert G. Bear,

Veterans' Administration.

Pierre Blouke,

Federal Home Loan Bank Board (Federal Loan Agency).

Carroll W. Chamberlain,

Public Buildings Administration (Federal Works Agency).

Joseph M. DallaValle,

Public Health Service (Federal Security

Agency).

John Donovan,

Farm Security Administration (Agriculture).

CHAIRMEN OF SECTIONS

Specifications Materials Maintenance

Carroll "W. Chamberlain Elsmere J. Walters John H. Schaeper

Mechanical Equipment Methods and Practices

Robert K. Thulman

George E. Knox,

Yards and Docks (Navy).

Vincent B. Phelan,

National Bureau of Standards (Commerce).

Edward A. Poynton,

Office of Indian Affairs (Interior).

George W. Trayer,

Forest Service (Agriculture).

Elsmere J. Walters,

Construction Division (War).

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 United States Department of Agriculture is cooperatnig with both committees on investigations of wood constructions.

[For list of BMS publications and how to purchase, see cover page III.)
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE • Harry I.. Hopkins, Secretary

NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS • Lyman J. Briggs, Director BUILDING MATERIALS

and STRUCTURES

REPORT BMS42

Structural Properties oi Wood-Frame Wall and Partition

Constructions With "Celotex" Insulating Boards

Sponsored by The Celotex Corporation

by HERBERT L. WHITTEMORE and AMBROSE H. STANG

with the collaboration of

Thomas R. C. Wilson

Forest Products Laboratory

Forest Service, United States Department ot Agriculture

ISSUED MARCH 2, 1940

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

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

be construed accordingly.

UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT

FOR SALE BY THE SUPERINTENDENT OF

PRINTING OFFICE • WASHINGTON

DOCUMENTS, WASHINGTON, D. C. • PRICE lO

1940

CENTS
Foreword

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

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 the description of materials and methods used in their fabrication. The Bureau is responsible for the method

of testing and the test results. This report covers only the load-deformation relations and strength of the structural

elements of a house when subjected to compressive, transverse, concentrated, impact,

and racking loads by standardized methods simulating the loads to which the elements

would be subjected in actual service. Later it may be feasible to determine the heat

transmission at ordinary temperatures and the fire resistance of these same constructions.

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

BMSl and BAIS2. 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 Properties of Wood-Frame Wall and Partition Constructions with "Celotex" Insulating Boards Sponsored by

The Celotex Corporation

by HERBERT L. WHITTEMORE and AMBROSE H. STANG

with the collaboration of Thomas R. C. Wilson, Forest Products Laboratory, Forest Service, United States Department of Agriculture

CONTENTS

Page

Foreword ii

I. Introduction ^ 1 II. Sponsor and product 2 Specimens and tests 2 Materials

1. Wood

2. Insulating hoard

3. Nails

4. Plaster WaU BX

III. IV.

V.

3

3

56

67

1. Sponsor's statemeiit 7

7

9

(a) Four-foot wall specimens..

(b) Eight-foot wall specimens _ 2. Compressive load 11

3. Transverse load 11

4. Concentrated load 12

5. Impact load 13

6. Racking load 14

Page

VL Wall BY 14

1. Sponsor's statement 14

(a) Four-foot wall specimens 14

(b) Eight-foot wall specimens 15

2. Compressive load 16

3. Transverse load 17

4. Concentrated load 17

5. Impact load 17

6. Racking load 19

VII. Partition BZ 20

1. Sponsor's statement 20

2. Concentrated load 21

3. Impact load : 21

VIII. Partition CA 21

1. Sponsor's statement 21

2. Concentrated load 22

3. Impact load 23 IX. Sjionsor's comments 23

ABSTRACT

For the program on the determination of tlie struc- tural properties of low-cost house constructions, The

Celotex Corporation submitted 42 specimens repre- senting 2 wall and 2 partition constructions having

wood framing with "Celotex Vapor-seal Insulating"

sheathing, "Celotex" building board, and "Celotex

Vapor-seal Insulating" lath. The wall specimens were subjected to compressive,

transverse, concentrated, impact, and racking loads and

the partition specimens to impact and concentrated

loads. The transverse, concentrated, and impact

loads were applied to both faces of the wall specimens.

The deformation under load and the set after the load was removed were measured for uniform increments of load, except for concentrated loads, for which the set only was determined. The results are presented in graphs and in tables.

I. INTRODUCTION

To provide technical facts on the performance

of constructions which might be used in 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 report BMSl, Research on Building Materials antl Structures for Use in Low-Cost Housing, and that part of the

program relating to structural properties in

report BMS2, Methods of Determining the

Structural Properties of Low-Cost House Constructions.

Alasonry constructions and wood constructions of types which have been extensive^ used

in this country for houses were included in the

program because their behavior under widely

different service contlitions is known to builders

[1]
and the public. The reports on these constructions are BMS5, Structural Properties of Six

Masonry Wall Constructions, and BMS25,

Structural Properties of Conventional WoodFrame 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 buUt and tested hj the Forest

Products Laboratory at Madison, Wis.

The present report describes the structural

properties of constructions sponsored by one of the manufactiu-ers in the building industry.

The specimens were subjected to compressive,

transverse, concentrated, impact, and rackingloads, simulating loads to which the elements

of a house are subjected. In actual service,

compressive loads on a wall are produced by

the weight of the roof, second-story walls if any, furniture and occupants, and snow and

wind loads on the roof. Transverse loads on a

wall are produced by the wind, concentrated

and impact loads by furniture or accidental

contact with heavy objects, and racking loads

by the action of the wind on adjoining walls. For non-load-bearing partitions, impact loads

may be applied accidentally by furniture or by

a person falling against a partition, and con- centrated loads by a ladder or other object

leaning against the partition.

The deformation and set under each increment of load were measured because, considered as a structure, the suitability of a wall or partition construction depends not only on its resistance to deformation when loads are applied but also on whether it returns to its original size and shape when the loads are removed.

II. SPONSOR AND PRODUCT

The specimens were submitted by The

Celotex Corporation, Chicago, 111., and repre- sented wood-frame wall and partition constructions with sugarcane-fiber insulating board

as sheathing, building board, and lath, marketed

under the trade names "Celotex Vapor-seal

Insulating" sheathing, "Celotex" building

board, and "Celotex Vapor-seal Insulating"

lath. The wood framing was Douglas fir, No. 1

common. The constructions had nominal 2- by

4-in. studs, spaced 1 ft 4 in. on centers, fastened

to a single floor plate and to a double top plate.

The framing of the partition constructions was

similar to that of the wall constructions,

except that the top plate was single, not

double.

The outside face of the wall constructions was sheathing covered with wood bevel siding.

The inside face of the wall constructions and

both faces of the partition constructions were

either building board or lath and plaster.

III. SPECIMENS AND TESTS

The two wall constructions and the two partition constructions were assigned the symbols

given in table 1. The individual specimens were assigned the designations given in table 2.

Table 1.Constr uction symbols

Element

Construction symbol

Outside face Inside face Both faces

Wall

Do

BX

BY

"Celotex Vaporseal Insulat- ing" sheathing and wood

bevel siding. ...do

"Celotex Vaporseal Insulating" lath and

plaster. ''Celotex''

Partition- BZ

building board. "Celotex Vaporseal Insulat- ing" lath and

plaster. Do..., CA ''Celotex''

building

board

Table 2.Specimen designations, walls BX and BY

partitions BZ and CA

Element

WallDo.. Do..

Do.. Do_.

Do..

Do..

Do..

Partition Do..

Specimen

designation

CI, C2, CS..

Tl, TS, TS..

TJt, T5, T6^^ PI, PB, PS''. Pi, PS, P6^

II, 12, IS U, IB, 16.... Rl, R2, RS..

PI, P2, PS*-

II, 12, IS....

Load

Compressive.

Transverse do

Concentrated. do Impact

do Racking

Concentrated. Impact

Load

applied

Upper end.

Inside face. Outside face. Inside face. Outside face. Inside face. Outside face. Top plate. Either face. Do.

a The concentrated and impact loads were applied to the same speci- mens. The concentrated loads were applied first. The specimens were tested in accordance

with the procedure outlined in BMS2, Methods

of Determining the Structural Properties of Low-Cost House Constructions, which also gives the requirements for the specimens and

describes the presentation of the results of the

[2]
tests, particularly the load-deformation graphs.

Thomas R. C. Wilson, of the Forest Products

Laboratory, Madison, Wis., cooperated with

the Bureau staff in this work by giving advice

and making suggestions on the technique of testing wood structures. For the compressive test the thickness of the

wall was taken as the thickness of the structural

portion, that is, the distance from the inside

surface of the studs to the outside surface of the

studs. The compressive load was applied along

a line parallel to the inside face, and at a

distance from the inside surface of the studs of one-third the thickness of the wall. For woodframe constructions under compressive load

there is considerable local shortening caused by

crushing of the floor plate and the top plate at the ends of the studs. As a result, the shortening

of the entire specimen is not proportional to that of a gage length over only part of the height.

Therefore the shortenings and sets were measured by means of compressometers attached to the steel plates through which the load was

applied to the specimen, not attached to the

specimen as described in BMS2.

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. In use the

channel of the deformeter rested along the top

of the specimen, 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. Two dial micrometers were attached to a steel block which was

in contact with the floor plate of the specimen

at the stop. The spindles of the micrometers

were in contact with rigid extensions of the

steel angle of the deformeter. The gage length

(distance from the top of the specimen to the

center of the steel block) was 7 ft 11}^ in. The micrometers were graduated to 0.001 in. and readings were recorded to the nearest

division. This deformeter was used instead of the taut-wire mirror-scale device described in

BMS2.

Before applying the loads, the speed of the

movable head of the testing machine was

measured under no load. For compressive

loading the speed was 0.072 in./min. and for transverse loading 0.1,4 in./min. These speeds

were reconnnonded by the Forest lV)ducts

Laboratory. Racking loads were ap[)lie(l by means of a jack operated iii:inuall\', and th(! speed could not be closely j-cgiilated.

Each plastei-ed specimen, BX and BZ, was

tested on the 28th day following the application

of the finish coat of plaster.

The tests were begini January 3, 1939, and

completed January 13, 1939. A representative

of the sponsor witnessed the tests.

IV. MATERIALS

The information for this statement was obtained from the sponsor and from inspection of the specimens. The Forest Products Laboratory assisted by idcTitifying the species of the

wood and by supervising the determination of the moisture content. The Paper Section of this Bureau assisted by determining the physical

properties of the sheathing, building board, and

lath and the Lime and Gypsum Section by

determining the properties of the plaster.

1. Wood

Framing.—Studs, floor plates, and top plates,

identified as Douglas fir, Pseudotsuga taxifolia. No. 1 common, S4S (surfaced four sides), 1% by

3% in. (nominal 2 by 4 in). Weyerhaeuser

Timber Co.

Bevel siding. —Identified as southern cypress, Taxodium distichum. Select, grade B or better,

A6 by %6 by 5}i in. Table 3.

Moisture content of the ivood

[Determined on the day the wall or partition specimen was tested]

Moisture content " Wood Construction symbol Mini- mum

Maxi- mumAverage

Framing.. _

IBX

Percent

8

8

1010

Percent

16

1714

14

Percent

101312

11

\bv

]BZ

Average

[CA

12

Bevel siding jBX » <7

7

8 [by 10 8

" Based on the weight when oven dry. "Less than" (<) symbol.

After each specimen was tested, one face was

removed to expose the studs, and photographs were taken showing the knots and failures. Typical specimens are shown in figures 1 and 2.

[3]

The moisture content of the wood is given in table 3. An electrical moisture meter was used when

determining the moisture content. The meter

was graduated for Douglas fir and red cypress. The correction term of the meter for Douglas

fir was determined by taking one sample of the

wood from the framing of each specimen.

Each sample was dried in an oven at 212° F

until the weight was constant. The moisture

content was the difference between the initial weight and the weight when dry, divided by

the weight when dry. The average reading for these samples was 0.4 less than the average of the meter readings, and therefore the moisture

content of the Douglas fir was obtained by

subtracting 0.4 from the meter readings and

rounding the result to the nearest whole

number.

For the bevel siding (red cypress) the correction term was not ascertained.

The moisture content of the wood in each

specimen was determined on each stud and on

the top and floor plates. Measurements were made on about half the pieces of bevel siding.

2. Insulating Board

All the insulating boards were made from

bagasse, the fibers of sugarcane after the sugar

has been extracted. In the process of manufacture the fibers are cooked and washed

repeatedly to remove the soluble matter, then

chemically treated to increase water resistance

and resistance to rot and termites. The fibers,

without the addition of adhesives, are then

fabricated into continuous boards. The sponsor's published value for the thermal conductivity of these boards is 0.33 (Btu/hr

ft^)/(°F/in. thickness).

"Celotex" building board.—Rigid building

board, ^ in. thick. One surface was smooth

and covered with one coat of lithopone casein

paint, applied by rollers before the sheets were

dry; the other face had a "sanded" finish. The color of the smooth face was deep ivory

and that of the "sanded" face neutral tan. "Celotex Vapor-seal Insvlating" sheathing.—

Rigid insulating board, ^?^2 in. thick. The

entire surface, including the edges, was coated

with hot asphalt by dipping. The interior face

was covered also with one coat of aluminum

paint applied by spraying.

"Celotex Vapor-seal Insulating" /aiA.— Rigid

insulating board, shown in figure 3, }{ in. thick, 1 ft 6 in. by 4 ft 0 in. One surface was

coated with asphalt and then with one coat

of aluminum paint. The opposite face is intended for the application of plaster. The

long edges were shiplapped, and all edges of the

Figure 3."Celotex Vapor-seal Insulating" lath.

face to which the plaster was applied were

beveled.

Physical properties.—The physical properties

of the insulating boards are given m table 4. The samples of the boards were taken from

the specimens after they had been tested. Probably the properties of the lath were affected

by the removal of the plaster.

The transverse strength and deflection at ultimate load, tensile strength, and linear ex- pansion were determined by the Paper Section

of this Bureau by the methods described in Federal Specification LLL-F-321a, Fiber

[5]
Table 4.

Physical properties of the building board, sheathing, and lath

[Thesamples of insulating board were taken from the wall and partition specimens after the structural iiropertios had been determined. The values may not be representative of current production]

Insulating board

"Oelotex" building board.

Thickness

"Celotex Vapor-seal Insulating sheathing.

"Celotex Vapor-seal Insulating

lath.

Transverse test Tensile strenath

Specimen

tBY-Tl.

\CA-IS-. IBY-Tl. \BX-T1. BX-Tl.

iBZ-Il..

Strength

Across

long

direc- tion a

lb 13.3 12.8

42. 5 37.0

18. 5 18.0

Across

short

direc- tion i>

lb 11.6 10.4

34.0

28.6

14.2

14.6

Deflection at ultimate load Lengthwise Across Across ' of long ! short ' board

direc- direc- tion » tion i>

in.

0. 82

in.

0. 85

1.01

0.41

.43

.76

.81

Ibjin.i 270

235

234

320

232

Cros.«- wise

of board

206

168

144

162

225

228

Linear ex- pansion

for 47- percent

relative- humidity

change

Percent

0.2

.2

.3

.1

.2

.2

Density, dry

17.1

17.3

19.5 19.0

18.0

18.0

Nail-holding

strength (lateral)

Lengthwise

of board

122

117

» The .samples were cut lengthwise of the board.

Board; Insulating. Because the samples were

taken from wall and partition specimens which

had lieen tested, the values may not be repre- sentative of current production. The thermal

conductivity and water absorption were not

measured.

The nail-holding, strength was measured by

the method described in BMS4, Accelerated

Aging of Fiber Building Boards, except that

the nails (common, 6d, 2 in. long, No. 11}^ steel wire, 0.113-in. diam) were in., not % in., from

the edge of the board. The distance was ){ in. because this was approximately the distance

from the nails to the edge of the board in the

wall and partition specimens.

The moisture content of the building board,

sheathing, and lath, determined on one sample

from each specimen by oven-drying at 212° F

to a constant weight, is given in table 5.

Table 5.

Moisture content of building board, sheathing,

and lath

[Determined on the day the wall or partition specimen was tested]

Thickness

Construction symbol

Moisture content »

Board

Mini- mumMaxi- mum

Average

"Celotex" building board

in. \CA...

Percent

6

6

Percent

8

6

Percent

7

6

"Celotex Vapor-seal Insulat- ing" sheathing. } 2?^2 (BY... \BX...

4

4

766

5

"Celotex Vapor-seal Insulat- ing" lath. } M

IBX...

\BZ..._

5

6 87

6

6

Cross- wise

of board

58

54

121 105

k The samples were cut crosswise of the board.

3. Nails

The nails were made from steel wire, and the

description is given in table 6.

Table 6.

Description of nails

Type Size Length

Steel wire gage Diameter Head Finish

Common brad Penny in.m2H

3Hm2

Nn.

16WVi

8

13

11

in.

0. 0625

.131

. 162 .0915 .1205

in. Bright. Do.

Do.

Blued.

Zinc-coated.

Common 8 Do 16 Plasterboard Roofing Hi

Vii

4. Plaster

Three

scratch coat

Based on the weight when oven-dry.

coats of plaster were applied—

a

in. thick, composed of about 1 part of neat gypsum plaster and 2 parts of sand,

by weight; a brown coat, Ys in. thick, composed

of about 1 part of neat gypsum plaster and 3 parts of sand, by weight; and a finish coat. Vie in. thick, composed of 1 part of gaging plaster

and 3 parts of finishing lime putty, by volume;

total thickness, }^ in. The contractor was in- structed to apply the plaster to the specimens

as he would to the walls of a house.

The neat gypsum plaster was United States

Gypsum Co.'s "Red Top"; gaging plaster,

Certain-Teed Products Corporation's "Blue

Rapids"; and finishing lime, Standard Lime &

Stone Co.'s "Washington." The sand was Potomac River building sand, passing a No. 8

mesh sieve.

[6]
Unless otherwise stated, the properties of the

plaster were determined according to Federal

Specification SS-P-401, Plaster; Gypsum.

Time of set of the neat gypsum plaster was 12

hr, and the average tensile strength of six samples was 270 lb/in. ^—which complied with

the requirements in the specification.

A laboratory sample consisting of 1 part of neat gypsum plaster and 2 parts of sand, by

weight, had a time of set of 11}^ hr and a tensile

strength of 150 lb/in. ^, when prepared so as to have a slump of Yi in. A laboratory sample consisting of 1 part of neat gypsum plaster and 3 parts of sand, by weight, had a time of set of

9 hr and a tensile strength of 95 lb/in. ^, w^hen

siniilarly prepared and tested. Accelerator was added to the plaster on the

job to decrease the time of set. Samples were

taken of the plaster for the scratch and brown

coats on the plastered specimens BX and BZ.

The physical properties are given in table 7.

Table 7.Physical properties of the sanded plaster, wall BX and partition BZ

Specimens

BX-Cl, C2, Tl, P4, PS,U, 15, Rl:

Scratch coat Brown coat _ BX-C3, Tf, TS, RB:

Scratch coat Brown coat _. BX-Ti, To, PI, Pfi. II. 16: Scratch coat Brown coat BX-T6, P2, PS, 12, IS, RS, BZ-Il

12. IS: Scratch coat Brown coat

Slump

Vie

IS-!.

Time

of set

Plaster- Tensile ! sand

strength »i ratio, by

i weight i"

hr

42\i

214

3

5H

3H

lb/in.

140

120

50

12040

13060

1 : 2. 19

1 : 3. 37

1 : 2. 16

1 : 2. 16

1 : 3. 39

» Average for 6 briquets. Determined when the weight was constant within 0.1 percent.

>> Determination of sand in set plaster: Ammonium acetate method,

Report of Committee C-11, Proc. Am. Soc. for Testing Materials, 38. pt. 1. 1323 (19,38). The tensile strength of the sanded plaster

varied with the plaster-sand ratio and with the

quantity of water in the plaster mix. There are no requirements in Federal Specification SS-P401 for the tensile strength of plaster which has

been sanded on the job.

V. WALL BX

1. Sponsor's Statement

Wall BX was a wood-frame construction with

"Celotex Vapor-seal Insulating" sheathing and

wood bevel siding on the outside face, and

"Celotex Vapor-seal Insulating" lath and plaster on the inside face. The price of this construction in Washington,

D. C, as of July 1937, was $0.51/ftl

(a) Four-Foot Wall Specimens

The 4-ft. wall specimens, shown in figure 4, were 8 ft. 0 in. high, 4 ft. 0 in. wide, and 6 in.

Figure 4.

Four-foot wall specimen BX.

A, stud; B, floor plate; C, top plate; D, insulating-board sheathing; E

bevel siding; F, insulating-board lath; and 0, plaster.

thick. Each specimen consisted of a wood

frame to which the faces were fastened. The

frame consisted of three studs, ^4, fastened to a

floor plate, B, and to a top plate, C, by nails; the outside face, of insulating-board sheathing,

D, and wood bevel siding, E; and the inside

face, of insulating-board lath, F, and plaster,

G. The specimens were not painted.

Studs.—The studs, A, were Douglas fir, 1% by 3% in. (nominal 2 by 4 in.) by 7 ft. lYs in., S4S (surfaced four sides), spaced 1 ft. 4 in. on

centers, and toenailed to the floor plate and top

plate with 8d common wire nails, five nails to

[7

200729°- 40 2
each end, two through each side, and one

through one edge of the stud.

Floor plate.—The floor plate, B, was Douglas

fir, 1^^ by 3% in. (nominal 2 by 4 in.) by 4 ft. 0 in., S4S.

i'lGL'HE .J.- Typical wall sjiecimen, BX and BY.

The splits in the siding are indicated by the arrowheads. Top plate.—The top plate, C, consisted of two

pieces of Douglas fir, 1% by 3^8 in. (nominal 2 by 4 in.) by 4 ft. 0 in., S4S, fastened together by

six 16d common wire nails driven from the top

of the upper member of the plate, two at each

stud.

Sheathing.—The sheathing, D, was insulatingboard sheathing, 8 ft 0 in. long, 4 ft. 0 in. wide,

and in. thick, with the aluminum-painted

surface against the studs. It was fastened to the wood frame by 2-in. zinc-coated roofing

nails spaced 6 in. along studs and 3 in. along

both plates.

Berel siding.—The bevel siding, E, was red

cypress, 21 pieces, %6 by %6 by oji in., 4 ft. 0 in. long, 4oVn in. exposed to the weather. Each strip was fastened along the upper edge by 2-in. zinc-coated roofing nails, one at each stud,

and 1 M in. from the lower edge by 8d common

Figure 6.Wall specimen BX.

Arrangement of the lath.

wire nails, one at each stud. The 8d nails

caused numerous splits in the siding, as shown in figure 5. Lath.—The lath, F, was insulating boards,

five full courses and one course cut to a height

of 7% in., as shown in figure 6. There was a

vertical joint over the center stud in alternate courses of lath. The lath was fastened with

the beveled edges away from the studs. The

grooves formed by the beveled edges were

[8]
designed to give additional bond to the plaster.

The edges were in contact, and the lath was

fastened to the studs and plates by l}^-in.

plasterboard nails spaced about 3 in. Plaster.—The plaster, G, was K in- thick and

consisted of a scratch coat, a brown coat, and a

finish coat. The lath was dry when the plaster was applied. The overhanging edges were

supported by temporary spacers, which were removed immediately before the specimen was

tested.

{h) Eight-Foot Wall Sjjecimens

The 8-ft. wall specimens, shown in figure 7, were 8 ft. 0 in. high, 8 ft. 0 in. face width, and

6 in. thick. The specimens were similar

to the 4-ft. specimens, except that there were

seven studs, spaced 1 ft. 4 in. on centers. A

stud at each edge extended one-half its thick- ness beyond the faces. The over-all width was

8 ft. 1^8 in. Sheathing.—The sheathing consisted of two

insulating boards 8 ft 0 in. long and 4 ft 0 in. wide, having a vertical joint on the center stud.

The boards were fastened to the edge studs, center stud, floor plate, and top plate by 2-in. zinc-coated roofing nails spaced 3 in., about )!, in. from the edges of the boards; and to the other

four studs by 2-in. zinc-coated roofing nails

spaced 6 in. Table 8.

Stnictm-al properties, walls BX and BY

[Weight: Wall BX, 9.10 Ib/ft^; wall BY, 4.70 Ib/fP]

Figure 7.Eight-foot wall specimen BX.

stud; B, floor plate; C, top plate; D, insulating-board sheathing; E, bevel siding; F, insulating board lath; and G, plaster.

Load

Compressive ' Transverse ' Concentrated Impact ' Racking

Construction symbol

Speci- men

BX.

Average

BXAverage.

Average.

BY.

Average.

tCl.

[cs.

Maxi- mum

load

Speci- men

Kips/ft

S. 45 Tl.

T2-

8.72 n.

re.

4. 45

4. 92

4. 25 T2.

TS.

4. 54 nT5.

T6.

Maxi- mum

load

Speci- men

25S 350

345

PI. PS.

318

350 PJ,. 263 PB.

315 , P6.

309

259

255 350

PI

177 Pi.

305 P6.

260 P6.

247

Maxi- mum

load

Speci- men

308

325 500

378

950

774 600

115 103

101

106

500 I 74- 900 : U.

600 76.

666

Maxi- mum

height

of drop

Speci- men

ft

<! 10.0

d 10.0

<i 10.0

d 10.0

e 10.0

<i 10.0

9.0

<! 10.0

'1 10. 0

d 10.0

d 10.0

<i 10.0

10.0

e 10.0

Rl. m.

R3.

Rl.

RH.

R3.

.Vlaxi- load

• Kips/ft

1.82

1.62 1.72

1.72

1.48

1.30

1.40

1.39

•.The compressive loads were applied 1.21 in. (one-third the thickness

of the frame) from the inside surface of the studs.

>> Span 7 ft 6 in.

« A kip is 1,000 lb. * Specimen did not fail. No studs broken. Test discontinued.

• One or more studs broken. Test discontinued.

[9]
Figure 8.—^VaU specimen BX-Cl under compressive

load.

shor/enin^ In. Figure 9.

Compressive load on wall BX.

Load-shortening (open circles) and load-set (solid circles) results for specimens BX-Cl, C2, and C3. Load was applied 1.21 in. (one-third the thickness of the frame) from the inside surface of the studs. The

loads are in kips per foot of actual width of specimen.

-0.4 -0.2 0 0.2

lateral deflecfion in. Figure 10.

Compressive load on wall BX.

Load-lateral deflection (open circles) and load-lateral set (solid circles) results for specimens BX-Cl, C2, and C3. Load applied 1.21 in. (one-third the thickness of the frame) from the inside surface of the

studs. The loads are in kips per foot of actual width of specimen. The

deflections are for a gage length of 7 ft 10 in., the gage length of the

deflectometers.

[101
2. Compressive Load

Wall specimen BX-Cl under compressive

load is shown in figure 8. The results for wall

specimens BX-Cl, C2, and CS are shown in

table 8 and in figures 9 and 10. The lateral deflections shown in figure 10 were plotted to the right of the vertical axis for deflections of the specimen at midheight toward

the outside face (positive deflection) and to the

left for deflections toward the inside (plastered)

face (negative deflection).

Although the load was eccentric toward the

inside face, each of the specimens deflected

initially toward the inside face, probably be- cause the stiffness of the plaster counteracted

the effect of the eccentric load. The deflec- tions of the specimens were similar to the

deflections under similar eccentric loads of other wood-frame constructions, as described

in report BMS25, Structui'al Properties of Conventional Wood-Frame Constructions for Walls,

Partitions, Floors, and Roofs, and report

BMS31, Structural Properties of "Insulite"

500

Cm

^ ?00

^ m

o o

• O C

—ooop O

O

o /o

BXI

I ?

deflecflon in. 5

Figure 11.- 'T'ransverse load on wall BX, load applied to inside face.

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

Wall and "Insulite" Partition Constructions

Sponsored by The Insulite Co. As the maximum load was approached, the deflections

toward the inside face decreased. At the maximum loads the deflection of specimens Cl iuul CS was towai-d the inside face and \\v.\,\ of C2

300

?0Q

100

• o

•• o

—o c o m

\

O

o >uc

jOO

1

•

1•

OJXi

1•

l» CD

BX-4

0.5 1.0 1.5 7.0 deflecflon in. Figure 12.- Transverse load on wall BX, load applied to outside face.

Load-deHection (open circles) and load-set (solid circles) results for specimens BX-T4, Tn, and TG on the span 7 ft U in, was toward the outside face. The dotted lines

in figure 10 show the relation between lateral deflection and load for each of the specimens

after the maximum load. The change in the

direction of the deflection curve probably

indicates progressive local failure of the plaster.

Each of the specimens failed by crushing of the edges of the plaster at the top and bottom

of the specimen and by crushing of the studs

into the lower member of the top plate adjacent

to the inside (plastered) face. The lath

separated from the studs at the top plate, and

in specimen CS also at the floor plate. No

studs were ruptured except one stud of speci- men CI, which was split along the grain for 6 in. at the top.

3. Transverse Load

The results of the transverse-load test are shown in table 8 and in figure 11 for waU speci- mens BX-Tl, T2, and TS, loaded on the inside

(plastered) face, and in figure 12 for wall speci- mens BX-T4, T5, and T6, loaded on the

outside face.

[11]
The loaded (plastered) face of specimens

Tl , T2, and T3 cracked longitudinally along

both outer studs and transversely (across the

500

5^5 400

^ 300

I

S

100

i • —

•

«

•

• —m- • J •

<»

•

•

•

<» 0 0.0^ 0.04 0.06

indenfafion in. Figure 13.

Concentrated load on wall BX. load applied

to inside face.

Load-iiuleiitation results for specimens BX PI, PI, and PS. specimen) in several places. The first longitudinal cracks in specimen Tl occurred at a load

of 90 lb/ft' and a deflection of 0.36 in. There

were longitudinal cracks in specimens T2 and T'3 before they were tested. The first transverse cracks occurred at lath joints at or between the

loading rollers and were observed in specimens

Tl, T2, and T3 after loads of 240, 180, and 150

Ib/fV and deflections of 1.49, 1.20, and 0.81 in., respectively. At the maximum load specimen

Tl failed by rupture of one outer stud across the grain at a loading roller, accompanied by

rupture of the sheathing and lath at the same

place. Specimen T2 failed by rupture of one

outer stud at a knot near midspan, the sheathing

rupturing at the same place. An outei' stud in specimen T3 cracked in compression at a knot

near midspan at a load of 272 Ib/ft^. Specimen T3 failed by rupture of this stud at the

knot and by splitting of the center stud along

the grain, starting at a knot near midspan.

The siding on all the specimens was undamaged.

The plaster on specimens T/j., T6, and T6,

loaded on the outside (bevel siding) face,

cracked transversely (across the specimen) in several places, the largest cracks being at lath

joints. The first transverse cracks occurred

at loads of 50, 60, and 77 Ib/ft^ and deflections

of 0.18, 0.29, and 0.39 in. in specimens T^, T5,

and T6, respectively. One outer stud of

specimen TJf. partially ruptured at a knot near midspan at a load of 300 Ib/ft^. At the maxi- nuun load specimen T4 failed by further rupture of the same outer stud and by splitting of

the center stud along the grain near midspan.

Specimen T6 failed by splitting of one outer

stud along the grain at a knot near midspan.

One outer stud of specimen T6 partially ruptured at a knot under a loading roller at a load

of 283 Ib/ft^. At the maximum load specimen

T6 failed by splitting along the grain of the

other outer stud at a loading roller. The

sheathing and siding of specimens TJi., T5, and

T6 were undamaged.

4. Concentrated Load

The results of the concentrated-load test are shown in table 8 and in figure 13 for wall speci- mens BX-Pl, P2, and PS, loaded on the inside

?5

"^400

1 •

•

•

•

> • /

1

•

1m

/

/

/ •

•

•

•

BX-4

0.04 0.08 0.12 inolenfafion in. Figure 14.

Concentrated load on wall BX, load applied

to outside face. Load-indentation results for specimens BX-Pi, PS, and P6.

(plastered) face, and in figure 14 for wall speci- mens BX-P4, P5, and P6, loaded on the outside

face.

[12]
The concentratetl loads were applied to the

inside face of specimens Pi, P2, and P3 on the

plaster midway between two studs and about

2 ft 6 in. from one end of the specimen. Each

of the specimens failed by punching of the chsk

through the plaster and into the lath. The concentrated loads were applied to the

outside face of specimens P4, P5, and P6 on a

strip of siding midway between two studs and

about 1/4 hi. from the lower edge of the strip.

Under a load of 300 lb on specimen Po the

siding split along the grain tangent to one edge

of the disk. Lnder the maximum load on

specimen P5 the sidmg split along the grain on

opposite edges of the disk and crushed under the

disk. Specimens P4 ii^d P6 failed by splitting

of the siding along the grain tangent to one

edge of the disk.

5. Impact Load

The results of the impact test are showTi in

tables 8, 9, and 10 and in figiu-e 15 for wall

specimens BX-Il, 12, and 13, loaded on the

10

1^

.1.

2

—

p-O 1 c

I

)—o-^ —o—

1 mm—

o-o-f——o1 —oo

—00^-

o r•

-o

•

•

1

»—

BX-I

I ?

deflecfion in. 5

Figure 15.

Impact load on wall BX, load applied to ijiside face.

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

circles) results for specimens BX-Il. 12, and IS on the span 7 ft H in.

inside (plastered) face, and in figure 16 for wall

specimens BX-I4, 15, and 16, loaded on the

outside face.

The impact loads were applied to the center

of the inside face of specimens II, 12, and 13,

the sandbag striking the plaster directly over m

CD

1 op

m ^ 1 m t—

0

• 1

C

-<D—

>

c 5 —0- •—

» c 0 —0- —

0

0 0

-0—

1 -(D0 y

'

c —0-

)

•

1 M1

<

iD-f3 / —0-

0

1•

1•

1• p

cf

—<D (Di/—

' 0

0

BX-4

defleciion in. Figure 16.

Impact loud on wall BX, load applied to outside face.

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

circles) resixlts for specimens BX-I4, IS, and 16 on the span 7 ft 6 in.

the center stud. The effects of the unpact

loads are given in table 9.

Table 9.

Effects of impact load on wall BX, loaded on

the inside (plastered) face

Specimen II Specimen U Specimen IS

Description of eSects Height De- Height De- Height Deof flec- of flec- of flec- drop tion drop tion drop tion

Plaster: )t in. ft in. /' in. Cracked along outer studs - - 0.0 0.00 1.0 0. 36 1.0 0.45 Cracked transversely

along a lath joint 3.0 .84 4.0 .91 4.0 1.10 Failure by spalling along

previous cracks 4.0 1.01 4.5 1.20 Failure by rupture of lath and plaster along

outer studs 5.0 1.02 Lath niptiued under the sandbag - - 5.0 1. 19 7. 5 1.35 5.0 1.2S Face not loaded, failure by

separation of siding from

9.5 2.90

1 After the 10-ft drop the set of specimen II was 0.42 in.; of specimen 12, 0.13 in.; and of

specimen 13, 0.34 in. No studs were broken,

and the sheathing was not separated from the

studs.

[13]
The impact loads were, applied to the center

of the outside face of specimens 14, 15, and 16,

the sandbag striking the bevel siding directly

0 0.4 0.8 L? 1.6 deformafion in./8 f

Figure 17.

Racking load on wall BX.

Load-deformation (open circles) and load-set (solid circles) results for specimens BX-Rl. R2, and R3. The loads are in kips per foot of the

face width rif specimen. over the center stud. The effects of the impact

loads are given in table 10. Table 10.

Effects of impact load on wall BX, loaded on

the outside (bevel siding) face

Specimen /.{ Specimen 15 Specimen 16

Description of effects Height De- Height De- Height Deof flec- of flec- of flec- drop tion drop tion drop tion

Plaster: Cracked along one or ft in. ft in. ft in. more studs 2.5 0.83 l.b 0. 58 1.0 0. 52 Cracked transversely 2. 5 .83 2. 5 .80 1.0 . 52 Failure by spalling at previous cracks 4.0 1. 10 4.0 L 07 4.0 1.78 Center stud ruptured 5. 5 2. 38 Pieces of plaster fell off the specimen... ..... .. . 8.0 \. 68 S.O 1.62 7.0 3.31 Outer stud cracked

Failure of loaded face, speci- men broke in two

1

9.1.80 6.0 2.67

8. 5

9.0

4. 29

The sets after the 10-ft drop on specimens

and 15 were 0.26 and 0.16 in., respectively.

One outer stud and one siding strip of specimen

14 were split, but the outside face and sheathing

did not separate from the studs. The studs and

siding of specimen 15 were not cracked, but the

sheathing ruptured partially at midspan.

6. Racking Load

The racking-load test results for wall speci-

' mens BX-Rl, R2, and R3 are shown in table 8

and in figure 17. The racking loads were applied only to the * top plate, and the stop was in contact only with \ the floor plate at the diagonally opposite corner

of the specimen. | The inside (plastered) faces of the specimens

cracked in several places. In specimens Rl,

R2, and R3 the first cracks occurred at loads of I 1.625, 1.125, and 1.125 kips/ft and deforma-

"

tions of 0.95, 0.59, and 0.49 in./8 ft, respecj lively. These cracks were parallel to a diagonal

from the point of application of the load to the : stop. The plaster also cracked along hori-

'

zontal and vertical lath joints. At the maximum loads each of the specimens failed by

pulling of some of the nails through the edges

j of the sheathing and the lath, by displacement 1 of the sheathing panels along the vertical joint,

| and by separation of the lath from the studs. In specimen R3 the top plate separated Ya in. from the studs.

VI. WALL BY

1. Sponsor's Statement

Wall BY consisted of a wood frame with

"Celotex Vapor-seal Insiilating" sheathing and

wood bevel siding on the outside face, and with

"Celotex" building board on the inside face. It was similar to construction BX, except that

the inside face was braiding board, not lath

and plaster.

The price of this construction in Washington,

D. C, as of July 1937, was $0.415/ft^

(a) Four-Foot Wall Specimens

The 4 ft wall specimens, shown in figure 18, were 8 ft 0 in. high, 4 ft 0 in. wide, and 5/2 in. thick, each a wood frame to which the faces were

fastened. The frame consisted of three studs,

A, fastened to a floor plate, B, and to a top

plate, C, by nails. The outside face was

insulating-board sheathing, Z>, and wood bevel

siding, E. The inside face was building board,

F. The specimens were not painted.

Studs.—The studs, A, were Douglas fir, 1% by

3% in. (nominal 2 by 4 in.) by 7 ft Tji in., S4S

[14]
(surfaced four sides), spaced 1 ft 4 in. on centers,

and toenailed to the plates with 8d connnon

naUs, five to each end, two through each side,

and one through one edge of the stud.

Floor plate.—The floor plate, B, was Douglas

fir, 1% by 3% in. (nominal 2 by 4 in.) by 4 ft 0

in., S4S.

Top plate.—The top plate, C, consisted of two pieces of Douglas fir, 1% by 3% in. (nominal

2 by 4 in.) by 4 ft 0 in., S4S, fastened together

by six 16d common wire nails driven from the

top of the upper member of the plate, two at

eacti stud.

Sheathing.—The sheathing, D, was insulatingboard sheathing, 8 ft 0 in. long, 4 ft 0 in. wide,

and in. thick, with the aluminum-painted

surface against the studs. It was fastened to the frame by 2-in. zinc-coated roofing naUs

long, exposed 4J^ in. to the weather. Eacli

strip was fastened along the upper edge l)y 2-in. zinc-coated roofing nails, one at each stud,

and 1/4 in. from tlie lowoi' edge by 8d coiniiK)n

FiGUKE 18.

Four-foot wall specimen BY

A, stud; B, floor plate; C, top plate; B, insulating-board sheathing;

E, wood bevel siding; F, building board.

spaced 6 in. along studs and 3 in. along both

plates.

Bevel siding.—The bevel siding, E, was red

cypress, 21 pieces, by fu by o'^ in., 4 ft 0 in.

Co

.1;

1/

1

-•H H

r-O—

O--. u

—•€

<XD- -o—

-o

4

1 1

—«•L

-y-f— —

—oi\ 7

U

—oo

o

-o

7

BY

0 0.1 12 0.5 shor/en/ng in. Figure 19.

Compressive load on wall BY.

Load-shortening (open circles) and load-set (solid circles) results for specimens BY-Cl, C'f, and C3. Load applied 1.21 in. (one-third the

thickness of the frame) from the inside surface of the studs. The loads

are in kips per foot of actual width of specimen.

wire nails, one at each stud. The 8d nails

caused numerous splits in the siding, as shown

in figure 5. Building board.—The building board, F,

8 ft 0 in. long, 4 ft 0 in. wide, and K in. thick,

fastened to the frame by l}4-in. brads spaced

6 in. along studs and 3 in. along both plates.

(b) Eight-Foot Wall Specimens

The 8-ft wall specimens were 8 ft 0 in. high,

8 ft 0 in. face width, and oji in. thick, and were

similar to the 8-ft specimens of wall BX,

shown in figure 7, except that the inside face was building board, not lath and plaster.

Building board.—The building board consisted of two boards 8 ft 0 in. long and 4 ft. 0 in. wide, having a vertical jouit over the center

stud. The boards were fastened to the edge

studs, center stud, top plate, and floor plate by

1%-m. brads spaced 3 in., and to the other

four studs by 1/4 in. brads spaced 6 in.

15
1/

|#0-|

(U

L

1

1

1

i

•—

)

BY

0 0.2 04 0.6

laieral deflecflon in. Figure 20.

Compi-essive load on wall BY.

Load-lateral deflection (open circles) and load-lateral set (solid circles) results for specimens BY-Cl, C2, and C3. Load applied 1.21 in. (one- third the thickness of the frame) from the inside surface of the studs. The loads are in kips per foot of actual width of specimen. The lateral deflections are for a gage length of 7 ft 10 in., the gage length of the

deflectometers.

2. Compressive Load

The results for wall specimens BY-Cl, C2,

and C3 under compressive load are shown in

table 8 and in figures 19 and 20. In figure 20 the lateral deflections were plotted

to the right of the vertical axis for deflections

of the specimens at midheight toward the outside face (positive deflection) and to the left for deflections toward the inside face (negative

deflection). The deflection of the specimens

toward the inside (building board) face under

loads less than 3.5 kips/ft is similar to the

deflections under eccentric compressive loads

found for other wood-frame constructions, as described in reports BMS25 and BMS31.

The building board separated from all the

studs of specimen CI under a load of 3.0 kips/ft, of specimen C2 under a load of 2.2 kips/ft, and of specimen C3 under a load of 1.9 kips/ft. At

the maximum load the top plate of each specimen crushed locally at the inside surface of the studs and separated at the outside surface. The top plate rotated, pulling the nails from

Figure 21.— Wall specimen BY-Tl under transverse load.

\ 161
the studs and allowing the specimens to push

out under load without breaking the studs.

3. Transverse Load

Wall specimen BY-Tl under transverse load

is shown in figure 21. The results are given in table 8 and in figure 22 for wall specimens

BY-Tl, T2, and T3, loaded on the inside face,

and in figure 23 for wall specimens BY-T4, T5,

and T6, loaded on the outside face. One outer stud of specimen Tl ruptured at a load of 223 Ib/ft^; and at a load of 285 Ib/ft^ the

building board of specimen T3 buckled between

one loading roller and midspan, the heads of the nails pulling through the board. At the

maximum loads specimens Tl , T2, and T3

failed by rupture of the center and one outer stud at or between the loading rollers. One outer stud of specimen TJf split at a knot under a load of 118 Ib/ft^, and at the

maximum load all the studs broke at one of the

loading rollers and the t)uil(ling board ruptured

280

240

200

\ ISO

I

120

I

80

40

l—•1 •

1 —o

oBr-/

Figure 22.-

OJ 1.0 1.5 2.0 defleciion in.

- Transverse load on wall B \ loaded on the inside face.

Load-defleotion (open circles) and load-set (solid circles) results for speci- mens BY-Tl, T2, and TS on the span 7 ft 6 in.

at the same place. Specimen T5 failed by

rupture of one outer stud near midspan, and

specimen T6 failed by rupture of the center

stud, also near midspan.

4. CoNCENTltATKI) LoAO

Results of tlie concent ra t (ni-load test are shown in table 8 and in figiii-e 24 for wall spcci500

250

^ 200

I «

I

50

•-

•• <

o

•• •m

o

o o

o

•

• • ^

o

—o—o- o o

o, c >

r

O Q*" OCT c

o

Y BY-4 0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 defleciion in. Figure 23.—Transverse load on wall BY, loaded on the outside face.

Load-deflection (open circles) and load-set (solid circles) results for speci- mens BY-TI,, T5, and T6 on the span 7 ft 6 in. mens BY-PI, P2, and P3, loaded on the inside

face, and in figure 25 for wall specimens

BY-P4, P5, and P6, loaded on the outside face. The concentrated loads were applied to the

inside face of specimens Pi, P2, and P3, on

the building board midway between two studs

and about 2 ft from one end. Specimens PI,

P2, and P3 failed by pmicliing of the disk

through the building board.

The concentrated loads were applied to the

outside face of specimens P^, P5, and P6, on the bevel siding 1}^ in. from the lower edge

of a strip of siding midway between two studs

and about 4 ft from one end. At the maximum

load each of the specimens failed by splitting

of the siding along the grain at opposite edges

of the disk.

5. Impact Load

Results of the impact test are shown in tables

8 and 11 and in figure 26 for wail specimens

BY-Il, 12, and 13, loaded on the inside (building board) face, and in figm-e 27 for wall speci-

[17]
80d

o

600

400

?00

•

- -w

•

•

< 1 —•

F

1

1•

1•

1»

h Br-4

10

0 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20

indeniaiion in. Figure 25.

Concentrated load on ivall BY, load applied

to outside face.

Load-indentation results for specimens BY-P4, PS, and P6.

5^ 6

2

0

1—

pO 1—

1

m •—

-0 Oy 0

/• •

—0

w

Y

ffY-4

0 2 4 6

defiedion in. Figure 27.

Impact load on wall BY, load applied to outside face.

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

circles) results for specimens BY~Ii, 15, and 16 on the span 7 ft 6 in.

18
mens BY-I4, 15, and 16, loaded on the outside

face. The impact loads were applied to the center

of the inside face of specimens II, 12, and IS,

the sandbag striking the building board directly over the center stud. The effects are given

in table 11.

T.-iBLE 11.Effects of impact load on wall BY, loaded on

the inside face

Description of effects on the loaded (building board)

face

Separation between studs and building board

Building board cracked under bag

Failure of face by rupture of the building board

Specimen It Specimen IH Specimen IS

Height

of drop

Deflec- tion

Height

of drop

Deflec- tion

Height

of drop

Deflec- tion

3.0

in.

1. 21

ft

2. 5

in.

1. 15 5.0

in.

1. 51

3. 5 1.30 2.0 1.02 4. 5 1. 40

5.0 1. 54 3.0 1.25 6.5 1.88

The negative values of the set shown in figure 26 were caused by separation of the

building board from the studs. The sets after a drop of 10 ft were 0.072, 0.054, and

0.049 in. for specimens II, 12, and IS, respectively. The studs, sheathing, and siding did

not fail, and the sheathing did not separate

from the studs.

The impact loads were applied to the outside face of specimens 14, 15, and 16, the

sandbag striking the siding directly over the

center stud. In these specimens the building

board separated from the studs at midspan at drops of 2.0, 2.5, and 1.5 ft, respectively, the

heads of the nails pulling through the board.

At the maximum loads the building board

separated completely from the studs except

near the top and bottom of the specimens. In specimen 14 the studs, sheathing, and sid- ing did not fail. In specimen 16 the center stud ruptured at a drop of 7.5 ft and the outer

studs at a drop of 10 ft. In specimen 16 the

center stud cracked at a drop of 6.0 ft, one

outer stud ruptured at a drop of 7.0 ft, and

at a drop of 9.0 ft the face not loaded failed

by rupture of the building board. The sets after a drop of 10 ft on specimens /4, 15, and

16 were 0.159, 0.296, and 1.707 in., respectively.

6. Racking Load

Wall specimen BY Rl under racking load is shown in figure 28. The results for wall

specimens BY R1 , R2. mid R3 iirc </\\c\) in table 8 and in figure 29. The racking loads were iipplicd ouIn to the

top plate and the stop was in contact only

with the floor plate. At loads of 1 .125, 1.125,

and 0.875 kips/ft on spcciincns Rl , R2, and

US, respectively, there was noticeabJe vertical

displacement of the building boai'd at the

Figure 28.—Wall .'ipecinun BY-Rl under racking load.

joint. At the maximum loads the nails along

the top plate and the upper part of the edge

studs pulled through the edges of the board.

The nails tore through the edge of the sheathing along the edge stud which was against the

stop, the vertical displacement increasing both

between the two building boards and between

the two sheathing boards. Also, the top plate

separated from the tops of the studs.

[19]
VII. PARTITION BZ

1. Sponsor's Statement

Partition BZ was a wood-frame construction

with plaster and "Celotex Vapor-seal Insiilat1.4

1.2

1.0 .1-

^0.6

1 Q.4

0.2

•

1 o

o

m —J,

O JCO

O jOO

1

/

i T

m <n> '/

If

j BY

0 0.5 1.0 1.5 deformafion in./Sff

Figure 29.Racking load on wall BY.

Load-deformation (open circles) and load-set (solid circles) results for specimens BY-HI , R2, and iJJ. The loads are in kips per foot of the

face width of specimen. ing" lath on both faces. The frame was similar

to that of walls BX and BY, and both faces were similar to the inside face of wall BX.

The price of this construction in Washington, D. C, as of Juh- 1937, was $0.44/ftl

The partition specimens, shown in figure 30, were 8 ft 0 in. high, 4 ft 0 in. wide, and b% in. thick; and they consisted of a frame of three

studs. A, fastened to a floor plate, B, and a top

plate, C, by nails, with insiilating-board lath,

D, and plaster, E, as both faces. The speci- mens were not painted.

Studs.—The studs. A, were Douglas fir, 1%

by 3% in. (nominal 2 by 4 in.) by 7 ft 7}i in., S4S (surfaced four sides), spaced 1 ft 4 in. on

centers, and toenailed to the plates with 8d

jommon wire naUs, five nails to each end, two

through each side, and one through the edge of

the stud.

Floor plate. —The floor plate, B, was Douglas

fir, 1^^ by 3% in. (nominal 2 by 4 in.) by 4 ft 0in.,S4S.

Top plate.—The top plate, C, was two pieces

of Douglas fir, 1% by 3% in. (nominal 2 by 4 in.)

by 4 ft 0 in., S4S, fastened together by six 16d

common wire nails driven from the top of the

upper member of the plate, two at each stud.

Lath.—The lath, D, was insulating board,

five full courses and one course cut to a height

of 7 % in., as shown in figure 6. There was a

vertical joint over the center stud in alternate courses of lath. The lath was fastened with the

beveled edges away from the studs, forming

grooves designed to give additional bond to the

plaster. The edges were in moderate contact,

and the lath was fastened to the framing with

l)4-in. wire plasterboard nails spaced about

3 in. Plaster. —The plaster, E, was ji in. thick and

consisted of a scratch coat, a brown coat, and a

finish coat. The lath was dry when the plaster was applied. The overhanging edges were

Figure 30.Partition specimen BZ.

A, studs; B, floor plate; C, top plate; D, insulating-board lath; E, plaster.

supported by temporary spacers, which were removed immediately before the specimen was

tested.

[20]
2. Concentrated Load

The results for partition specimens BZ-Fl,

P2, and PS under concentrated load are shown

in table 12 and in figure 31. Table 12.

Structural properties, partitions BZ and

CA

[Weight: Partition BZ, 11.1 lb/ft.2; partition CA, 3.03 lb/ft.*]

Construction symbol

Load

Concentrated Impact »

Specimen Maximum

load Specimen

Maximum

height of drop

BZ.--- - \P1 \P2

lb 339

185 359

1112

ft

b 10. n

7. 5

b 10.0 Average . - .

[PS IS

294

CA ' \P1 \P2

100

100

107

1112 8.0

b 10. 0 8.0 Average

\PS IS

102

» Span 7 ft 6 in.

k Test discontinued. The concentrated loads were applied to the

specimens on the plaster midway between two

studs and 2 to 3 ft from one end. At the

maximum loads the specimens failed by punching of the disk through the plaster and lath.

3. Impact Load

Partition specimen BZ~I1 during the impact

test is shown in figure 32. The results for specimens BZ-Il, 12, and 13 under impact

load are given in tables 12 and 13 and in figure

33.Table 13.

Effects of impact load on partition BZ

Specimen II I Specimen 12 : Specimen IS

Description of effects

j Height

of drop

Deflec- tion

Plaster, first cracks: Face loaded Face not loaded

Failure of face by spalling of plaster at cracks: Face loaded Face not loaded Face loaded, lath broken by

sandbag. - Center stud:

First crack Rupture, sandbag pass- ing through specimen..

ft.1.0 2.0

4.0

4.0

4.5

10.0

0. 45

. 70

1.24

1.24

1. 33

3.02

Height

of drop

Deflec- tion

Height

of drop

Deflec- tion

ft. in. ft. in. 1.0 0.51 2.0 0.76

.0 .00 2.5 .89

4.0 1. 31 4.0 1.24 4.5 1.50 4.5 1.41

4.0 1. 31 6.5 1.98

6.0 3. 14 8.5 3. 72

7.5

striking the plaster directly over the center

stud. The eft'ects are described in tal)h' 13. After the 10-ft drop on specimens // iuid I'S the sets were 0.39 and 4.00 in., respectively.

The lath on the face not loaded was separated

from the studs at midspan.

500

o

oo

100

—

• •

« —

•

»

/ r

r

T•

1

BZ

The impact loads were applied to the center

of one face of each specimen, the sandbag

' 0 O.OF OM 0.06

indenfafion in. Figure 31.

Concentrated load on partition BZ.

Load-indentation results for specimens BZ-Pl, P2 and PS. VIIL PARTITION CA

1. Sponsor's Statement

Partition OA was a wood frame construction

with "Celotex" building board as both faces. The frame was similar to that of walls EX

and BY and of partition BZ, and both faces were similar to the inside face of wall BY.

The price of this construction in Washington,

D. C, as of July 1937, was $0.36/ft2.

The partition specimens in figure 34 were

8 ft 0 in. high, 4 ft 0 in. wide, and 4% in. thick; and consisted of a frame of three studs,

A, fastened to a floor plate, B, and a top plate,

C, by nails, with building board, D, as both

faces. The specimens were not painted.

Studs.—The studs, A, were Douglas fir, 1% by 3^^ in. (nominal 2 by 4 in.) by 7 ft 7^s in., S4S (surfaced four sides), spaced 1 ft 4 in. on

centers, and toenailed to the plates with Sd

common wire nails, five to each end, two

21
through each side, and one through one edge

of the stud.

Floor plate.—The floor plate, B, was Douglas

fir, 1% by 3% in. (nominal 2 by 4 in.) by 4 ft 0 in., S4S.

Top plate.—The top plate, C, consisted of two

pieces of Douglas fir, l^s by 3^8 in. (nominal 2 by 4

in.) by 4 ft 0 in., S4S, fastened together by sLx

16d common wire nails driven from the top of the

upper member of the plate, two at each stud.

Building board.—The building board, was

8 ft 0 in. long, 4 ft 0 in. wide, and Jo in- thick,

fastened to the wood frame by IJ^-in. wire

brads spaced 6 in. along studs and 3 hi. along

both plates.

2. Concentrated Load

Partition specimen CA-P3 under concentrated load is shown in figure 35. The results

for specimens CA-Pl, P2, and P3 are given m

table 12 and in figure 36.

Figure 32.

Partition specimen

BZ~I1 during the impact test.

The coiacentrated loads were applied on the

building board midway between two studs,

approximately 2 feet from one end. At the

maximum load failure occurred by punching

of the disk through the building board.

[22]
3. Impact Load IX. SPONSOR'S COMMENTS

The results for partition specimens CA-Il

12, and IS under impact load are shown in

tables 12 and 14 and in figure 37. The impact loads were applied to the center

of one face of each specimen, the sandbag

striking the building board directly over the

center stud. The effects are given in table 14.

Table 14.

Effects of impact load on 'partition CA

The spechnens submitted by the sponsor arc representative of conventional wood -frame conSpecimen 11 Specimen 12 Specimen IS

Description of effects Height De- Height De- Height Deof flec- of flec- of flec- drop tion drop tion drop tion

Face loaded: in. ft in. in. Cracked under sandbag. 2. 5 1.47 3.5 1.78 3.0 1.78 Failure by rupture of building board where sandbag struck 3.0 1.60 5.5 2.20 5.0 2.29 Face not loaded: Separated from studs 5.5 2. 22 4.5 2.08 4.5 2. 11 Failure by transverse rupture of building board 8.0 7.5 5. 81 Center stud:

First crack. .. 6.0 2.70 9.5 3. 43 7.5 5.81 Rupture, sandbag pass- ing through specimen.. 8.0 8.0

10

^5

1^

1—*1 • •

< o

>—

-o— •

(

-o—

o

)—

o •m o —o- o m

V

• o c

-o

) . o

-o

1 T

C

-o-o- )^ o •

1•

1 -•—

1T

•

•

1»

1 —

$

1 _/ • p sz

Figure 33.

/ ? 3

deflecfion in. Impact load on partition BZ.

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

circles) for specimens BZ— 12, and IS on the span 7 ft 6 in.

After the 10-ft drop on specimen 12 the set was 0.77 in., and no further effects were

observed.

Figure 34.

Partition specimen CA.

A, stud; B. floor plate; C, top plate; D, building board.

struction. The asphalt-coated sheathing in constructions BX and BY serves as thermal

insulation and also resists the passage of

moisture from the outside.

The inside face may be finished with either

of two materials. "Celotex Vapor-seal" lath

provides a plaster base, adds structm-al strength,

and resists the passage of moisture from the

inside face of the wall to the spaces between the

studs. "Celotex" building board adds strength

to the structure and presents a dm-able and

pleasing interior finish. The physical properties of the three "Celotex"

products described in this report are given in

table 15. These data were obtained August 1, 1939, in accordance with the sampling procedure and test methods of Federal Specification

LLL-F-321a, Fiberboard; Insulating, and may

be taken as representative of current manufacture.

[23]
FlGUKE O.J.

Pariitirni pcci iiiv ii L'A~FJ under co/iccnti ateil load.
Table 15.

Physical properties of building hoard, sheathing, and lath

[Samples obtained and tested by R. W. Hunt Co., engineers, in accordance with Federal Specification IyLI^F-321a]

Insulating board

''Celote.x" building board

"Celotex Vapor-seal Insulating" sheathing. "Celotex Vapor-seal Insulating" lath

Thickness

Inch

Transverse test

Tensile strength

Linear

expansion

for 47- porccnt

relative- humidity

change

Water

absorption Strength

Deflection at ultimate

load

Across

long

direction '

Across

short

diri'Ction '> Ma.ximuni Minimum

Pounds

18.8

37. 6 18.6

Pounds

1,3. 5

36. 8

16. 4

Inch

0. 82

.50

.82

Inch

0. lid

. 38 .79

/'miiul'

iiiclic •'

21(1 182

337. 5

Percent

0. 1.5

. 10

. 1.5

Percent

4.23

2.64

4. 92

• The samples were cut lengthwise of the board. The samples were cut crosswise of the board.

The physical properties of the plaster were

determined by the Lime and Gypsum Section

of this Bureau, under the supervision of L. S. Wells, with the assistance of W. F. Clark. The

physical properties of the building board, lath,

and sheathing were determined by the Paper

Section, under the supervision of B. W. Scribner, with the assistance of S. G. Weissberg.

The description and drawings of the speci- mens were prepared by E. J. Scliell, G. W. Shaw,

and T. J. Hanley of the Building Practice and

Specifications Section, under the supervision

of V. B. Phelan.

The structural properties were determined

by the Engineering Mechanics Section, under

the supervision of H. L. Whittemore and A. H.

Stang, with the assistance of the following

members of the professional stafi': F. Cardile,

H. Dollar, M. Dubin, A. H. Easton, A. S. Endler, M. Greenspan, C. D. Johnson, A. J. Suss- man, and L. R. Sweetman.

Washington, August 25, 1939.

[25]

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 lOjS BMS2 Methods of Determining the Structural Properties of Low-Cost House Constructions lOfi 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 15^ BMS6 Survey of Roofing Materials in the Southeastern States 15^ BMS7 Water Permeability of Masonry Walls 10^ BMS8 Methods of Investigation of Surface Treatment for Corrogion Protection of Steel 10<5 BMS9 Structural Properties of the Insulated Steel Construction Co.'s "Frameless-Steel" Constructions for Walls, Partitions, Floors, and Roofs 10^ BMSIO Structural Properties of One of the "Keystone Beam Steel Floor" Constructions Sponsored by the H. H. Robertson Co 10^ BMSll Structural Properties of the Curren Fabrihome Corporation's "Fabrihome" Constructions for Walls and Partitions I0<j: BMS12 Structural Properties of "Steelox" Constructions for Walls, Partitions, Floors, and Roofs

Sponsored by Steel Buildings, Inc 15^ BMS13 Properties of Some Fiber Building Boards of Current Manufacture 10^ 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 10^ BMS16 Structural Properties of a "Tilecrete" Floor Construction Sponsored by Tilecrete Floors, Inc - 10^ BMS17 Sound Insulation of Wall and Floor Constructions 10^ BMS18 Structural Properties of "Pre-Fab" Constructions for Walls, Partitions, and Floors Sponsored by the Harnischfeger Corporation 10^ BMSI9 Preparation and Revision of Building Codes 15^ BMS20 Structural Properties of "Twachtman" Constructions for Walls and Floors Sponsored by

Connecticut Pre-Cast Buildings Corporation 10(5 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 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 BMS31 Structural Properties of "Insuhte" 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 100 BMS34 Performance Test of Floor Coverings for Use in 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 & Manufacturing Co-. 100

[List continued on cover page IV]
BMS37 Structural Properties of "Palisade Homes" Constructions for Walls, Partitions, and

Floors Sponsored by Palisade Homes 10(i BMS38 Structural Properties of Two "Dunstone" Wall Constructions Sponsored by the W. E. Dunn Manufacturing Co 10(4 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(i BMS41 Effect of Heating and Cooling on the Permeability of Masonry Walls 10^ BMS42 Structural Properties of Wood-Frame Wall and Partition Constructions With "Celotex"

Insulating Boards Sponsored by The Celotex Co 10^