## 12 Experimental Test--[PERSON] and [PERSON] [18]  
[PERSON] and [PERSON] [18] performed experimental tests on eight 2D one-story one-bay RC frame specimens, which were identical in terms of geometry and reinforcement. The purpose of the experimental research was to study the influence of eccentric openings in masonry infills. The specimens were designed to a scale of 1:3 and subjected to cyclic loading of increasing intensity and constant axial load to the columns. To each column, an axial load of 50 kN was applied. To evaluate the developed mathematical model, experimental and analytical results for frames with code B are compared. This frame served as reference specimen for the other seven infilled ones.  
The dimensions and reinforcing details of frame B are shown in Figure 40. The cross-sectional dimensions of the columns were 150 \(\times\) 150 mm, with longitudinal reinforcements 80\(\mathcal{O}\)5.6 and ties \(\mathcal{O}\)3/34 mm, and of the beam 100 \(\times\) 200 mm with longitudinal reinforcement 70\(\mathcal{O}\)5.6 and transverse reinforcement \(\mathcal{O}\)3/40 mm in the critical regions and \(\mathcal{O}\)3/66 mm outside of them. The clear height of the columns was 800 mm and of the beam 1200 mm. A strong beam with cross sectional dimensions equal to 150 \(\times\) 500, adequately reinforced,  
Figure 38: [PERSON] et al. [8]—Specimen S2. Displacement loading history \(\delta_{x}\) vs. load step number.  
Figure 39: [PERSON] et al. [8]—Specimen S2. Force-displacement response \(P_{x}\)-\(\delta_{x}\).  
has been used for fixing the columns at their base. In plane uniaxial cyclic loading has been applied in the direction of beam axis (\(x\) or N-S direction).  
Table 10 summarizes the cross-section geometry and reinforcement data of the frame's beam and columns, the material data and the concrete and steel model properties used in the analysis.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c} \hline \hline Reinforcement data of frame & & \\ \hline
**Parameter** & **Columns** & **Beam** \\ \hline Section shape \& dimensions & \(150\times 150\) & \(100\times 200\) \\ (mm) & \(9\) & \(9\) \\ Clear length \(L_{\text{clear}}\) (mm) & \(800\) & \(1200\) \\ Longitudinal bars (mm) & \(80\text{S}5.6\) & \(70\text{S}5.6\) \\ Transverse reinf. (mm) & \(\mathcal{O}3/40\) & \(\mathcal{O}3/40\) \\ \hline Concrete properties of frame & & \\ \hline
**Concrete Property** & **Value** \\ \hline \(f_{\text{c}}\) (MPa) & \(28.51\) \\ \(E_{\text{cm}}\) (GPa) & \(26.70\) \\ \hline Steel properties of frame & & \\ \hline
**Steel Property** & **Value** \\ \hline \(f_{\text{y}}\) (MPa) & \(390.47\) \\ \(f_{\text{u}}\) (MPa) & \(600\) \\ \(E_{\text{s}}\) (GPa) & \(200\) \\ \hline Material strains used in analysis & & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{Concrete} & \(\varepsilon_{\text{c0}}\) (\%) & \(-2\) \\  & \(\varepsilon_{\text{ctr}}\) (\%) & \(-4\) \\ Steel & \(\varepsilon_{\text{y}}\) (\%) & \(\pm 2.00\) \\ \(\varepsilon_{\text{str}}\) (\%) & \(\pm 100\) \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 10: Experimental data of frame B. [PERSON] and [PERSON] [18].  
Figure 40: [PERSON] and Karayannis [18]—Geometry and reinforcement details of Frame B. Dimensions in (mm).  
Frame B was subjected to the uniaxial loading displacement path of Figure 41. The path consists of seven successive displacement patterns with their maximum values in increasing order. Each pattern consists of two cycles with equal positive and negative displacement values. This displacement record applied to the beam axis level.  
Figure 42 shows the base shear-top displacement response \(V_{x}\)-\(\delta_{x}\). A very good agreement is noticed between the analytical and the experimental response, with the exception of the small deviation on the pinching effect, which is not considered in the present form of the proposed mathematical model.