# Development of a System for Cyclic Shear Tests on Full-Scale Walls
## 2 Materials and Methods
### The Development Process  
The test system, designed in the open-source framework, was ruled by the following guidelines:  
* _Simplicity_. Through a structural arrangement that combined an actuator with basic structural systems (a reaction wall, a simply-supported beam, and a steel reaction gantry fixed in the base) and displacement transfer elements (connection pieces between the test beam and the specimen), an attempt was made to facilitate assembly and  
Figure 5: Wall specimens for cyclic shear tests: in-plane (**a**) and out-of-plane (**b**). reduce the complexity of potential unforeseen events. Vertical hinges were inserted to increase the degrees of freedom and to allow for the compatibility of rotations between the system components and the elements to be tested. A counterweight was inserted in the system close to the hinge connection between the actuator and the main test beam, seeking to facilitate the beam's vertical movement and consequently reduce the vertical shear force on the load cell positioned close to the wall. * _Availability of components, equipment, and human resources._ In addition to environmental sustainability, an attempt was made to use the existing pieces and equipment in the UA's Civil Engineering Laboratory to save financial resources and reduce work time. Thus, acquiring and manufacturing new elements were carried out only when strictly necessary (it is estimated that nearly 95% of the parts available in the laboratory were used to construct the test system). The manufactured parts were basically connection plates to make different drilling modulations compatible. Adaptations in existing parts for hole enlargement (transformation of simple holes into oblong holes) were also made to accommodate adjustments of measures in the connection of the test system with the specimens. New elements were acquired to allow for the movement of concrete footings and wall specimens, such as roller skids and two-point load lifting systems. In addition, a base footing was built in reinforced concrete with plan dimensions of 2.00 m \(\times\) 2.00 m with a height of 60 cm; this footing, together with two existing rectangular ones measuring 3.00 m \(\times\) 2.00 m \(\times\) 0.60 m each, allowed for the simultaneous construction of all 15 full scale wall specimens on the top of the footings. * _Rationalization of available space._ The part allocated to structural activities corresponded to approximately 1/3 of the UA Civil Engineering Laboratory. In addition, considering the area occupied by other specimens awaiting tests, in addition to the unavailability of the spaces reserved for further experiments, the site available was approximately half of the area reserved for the structures, that is, near 60 m\({}^{2}\). In this way, the test system and the footings with the wall specimens were designed to be operated and moved within this area. * _Scalability of tests in the available time._ Bearing in mind that the traditional shear test system contemplated only one wall per footing and the experimental program indicated the need to test 15 walls, different options for organizing the specimens to be tested were studied. In the first option, considering that the minimum life cycle time of a specimen was about two months (one week for construction, four weeks for curing, one week for instrumentation, one week for moving/testing/demolition, and one week for unforeseen/scheduling conflicts with other activities), the minimum time to carry out the work (disregarding the time to manufacture the blocks, transport, assembly of the test system, and recess/vacation periods) would be approximately 10 months [number of cycles (15 walls/3 footings available) \(\times\) time per cycle (2 months) = 10 months]. In addition to the highly time-consuming feature, this configuration proved unfeasible due to the unavailability of external labor (masons) to construct the specimens intermittently for long periods.