RACKING TESTS OF NON-STRUCTURAL BUILDING PARTITIONS

Architectural Engineering Department

School of Architecture and Environmental Design

California Polytechnic State University

San Luis Obispo. California 93407

NSFjRA-780526

Report ARCE R80-1

The Behavior of Architectural (Non-Structural) Building Components

During Earthquakes

Final Technical Report

RACKINGBUILDING

TESTS OF NON-STRUCTURALPARTITIONS

ByDr. Satwant S. Rihal

Professor

December 1980

SPONSORED BYTHE NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATIONDIVISION OF PROBLEM- FOCUSEDRESEARCH APPLICATIONS

GRANT No. PFR-78-23085

,l

50272 -101

REPORT DOCUMENTATION ,1. REPORT NO.

~ P_A_GE__ I NSF/RA-8005264. Title and Subtitle

Racking Tests of Non-Structural Building Partitions (TheBehavior of Architectural (Non-Structural) Building ComponentsDuring EarthquakesL_ Final TechnicaL~Report _

7. Author(s)

S.S. Rihal9. Performing Organization Name and Address

California Polytechnic State UniversityArchitectural Engineering DepartmentSchool of Architecture and Environmental DesignSan Luis Obispo, CA 93407

3. Recipient's Accession No.

PS.. 22079 05. Report Date

December 1980-----------~

6.

8. Performing Organization Rept. No.

ARCE R80-110. Project/Task/Work Unit No.

-----~~------------j11. ContractCC) Or Grant(Gl No.

(Cl

(G) PFR7823085f----------------------------~-~--__+-------~-------

13. Type of Report & Period Covered

Final14.

15. Supplementary Notes

Submitted by: Communications Program (OPRM)National Science FoundationWashington, D.C. 20550

I-------------------~- --- - -----16. Abstract (Limit: 200 words)

- ------- -----

The effects of inter-story displacement (drift) during earthquake-like conditionsare reported. A series of experiments were conducted (1) to study the correlationbetween inter-story relative displacement and building partition behavior underhorizontal racking loads; (2) to assess the threshold levels of partition damageduring horizontal racking actions; and (3) to determine the fundamental characteristics of non-structural building partitions (stiffness and energy absorptioncapacity and strength) under horizontal racking actions simulating earthquakemotion. Parameters in this study consist of geometry of partition configurationand placement of gypsum wallboard panels. Development of the testing program isdescribed and test results, sources of error, and future research plans are presented. Included in the appendices are drawings of test frame and partition testspecimens, results of racking tests, and photographs.

~-------------I-------~-

17. Document Analysis a. Descriptors

Earthquake resistant structuresBuildingsConstructionStructural members

b. Identifiers/Open·Ended Terms

Partitions (buildings)

c. COSATI Field/Group

18. Availability Statement

NTIS

(See ANSI-Z39.18)

Loads (forces)DisplacementEarthquakes

19. Security Class (This Report)

20. Security Class (This Page)

See Instructions on Reverse

21. No_ of Pages

22. Price

OPTIONAL FORM 272 (4-77)(Formerly NTIS-35)Department of Commerce

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The author acknowledges the assistance of student assistants

Michael Smith, Richard Sherry, Jim Hackett and Jim Jacques, seniors in the

Architectural Engineering Department, during the experimental phase of the

research program. The encouragement and support given by Professor Dell O.

Nickell, former Acting Head; Dr. David S. Hatcher, Head, Architectural

Engineering Department; Mr. George J. Hasslein, FAIA, Dean, School of

Architecture and Environmental Design, and support of the University Admin

istration, in general, is gratefully acknowledged. The support of the

Architecture Department in permitting Francis Hwang, graduate assistant in

the Department of Architecture, to assist in this project during Fall 1979

is acknowledged. The timely assistance of Jim Jacques and Jim Tully,

senior students in Architectural Engineering, in reduction of experimental

data, is especially acknowledged. The co-operation and assistance of

Mr. Bob Meyers, technician in the School of Architecture and Environmental

Design during the course of this project is acknowledged.

This research project was funded, in part, by the National Science

Foundation, Grant No. PFR-78-23085, and this support is gratefully

acknowledged.

The author would like to thank the following individuals for their

helpful suggestions and meaningful discussions held during the course of

this research project:

Preceding page blankii

Mr. John Fisher, Architect, Skidmore, Owings and Merrill,

Architects, San Francisco;

Mr. Sigmund A. Freeman, Structural Engineer, URS/John A. Blume

and Associates, Engineers, San Francisco;

Mr. Jacob Feldman, Associate Professor, Architectural Engineering

Department, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis

Obispo, California;

Professor Boris Bresler, Wiss, Janney, Elstner &Associates,

Emeryville, California;

Mr. Sven E. Thomasen, Consultant, Wiss, Janney, Elstner &Associates,

Emeryville, California.

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Acknowledgements

li st of Fi gures

List of Tables and Diagrams

Page

ii

v

xi

Introduction

3.2.1. General

Discussion of Test Results

Sources of Error . . .

Preliminary Conclusions.

Plans for Further Research

Scope and Objectives

Development of Testing Program

3.1 Review of Current Design and

Detailing Practices

3.2 Partition Test Specimens

1

3

5

14

16

18

20

25

26

28

30

5

7

7

9

13

13

Testing Procedure3.3.3.

Test Results

3.2.2. Description of Partition Specimens

3.3 Racking Test Method .

3.3.1. Testing Frame

3.3.2. System for Application and Measurement

of Loads and Displacements

Chapter 4

Chapter 5

Chapter 6

Chapter 7

Chapter 8

References

Chapter 1

Chapter 2

Chapter 3

Appendix A Drawings of Test Frame and Partition Test Specimens

Appendix B Results of Racking Tests

Appendix C Photographs

iv

LIST OF FIGURES

No. Page

APPENDIX A: DRAWINGS OF PARTITION TEST SPECIMENSAND TEST FRAME

Fig. Racking Tests of Partitions: Test Frame A-l

Fig. 2 Racking Tests of Partitions: Details of Test Set-up A-2

Fig. 3 Partition Test Panel Specimen Pl A-3

Fig. 4 Partition Test Panel Specimen P2 &P2A A-4

Fig. 5 Partition Test Panel Specimen P3 &P3A A-5

Fig. 6 Partit ion Test Panel Specimen P4 A-6

Fig. 7 Partition Test Panel Specimen P5 A-7




Fig. 11 Partition Test Panel Specimen P8A A-ll


Fig. 13 Part it ion Test Panel Specimen P10 A-13


APPENDIX B: RESULTS OF RACKING TESTS

Fig. 15 Trial Specimen PlLoad - Displacement Curves B-1

Fig. 16 Specimen P2Load - Displacement Curves B-2

Fig. 17 Specimen P2ALoad - Displacement Curves B-3

Fig. 18 Specimen P3Load - Displacement Curves B-4

v

No. Page


Fig. 19 Partition Specimen P3ALoad - Displacement Curves: 1/16" - 1/8" Cyc1es B-5

Fig. 20 Partition Specimen P3ALoad - Displacement Curves: 1/8" - 3/8" Cycles B-6

Fig. 21 Partition Specimen P4Load - Displacement Curves: 1/16" - 1/8" Cycles B-7


Fig. 23 Partition Specimen P5Load - Displacement Curves: 1/16" - 1/8" Cyc1es B-9






Fig. 29 Partition Specimen P8load - Displacement Curve B-15

Fig. 30 Partition Specimen P8Aload - Displacement Curves: 1/16" - 1/8" Cycles B-16

Fig. 31 Partition Specimen P8ALoad - Displacement Curves: 1/8" - 1/2" Cycles B-17

Fig. 32 Partition Specimen P9Load - Displacement Curves: 1/16" - 1/8" Cycl es B-18

Fig. 33 Partition Specimen P9load - Displacement Curves: 1/4" - 1/2" Cycles B-19

Fig. 34 Partition Specimen Pl0Load - Displacement Curves: 1/16" - 1/8" Cycles B-20

vi

No. Page


Fig. 35

Fi g. 36

Fi g. 37

Fi g. 38

Fig. 39

Fig. 40

Fig. 41

Fig. 42

Fig. 43

Fig. 44

Fi g. 45

Fig. 46

Fig. 47

Fig. 48

Fig. 49

Fig. 50

Fig. 51

Partition Specimen P10Load - Displacement Curves: 1/4" - 1/2" Cycles

Partition Specimen PllLoad - Displacement Curves: 1/16" - 1/8" Cycles

Partition Specimen PllLoad - Displacement Curves: 1/4" - 1/2" Cycles

Energy Absorbed vs. Peak Displacement of Cycles:Partition Specimens P2-Pll

Average Peak Load vs. Peak Displacement of Cycles:Partition Specimens P2-Pll

APPENDIX C: PHOTOGRAPHS

Partition Racking Test Set-up--Rear View

Partition Racking Test Set-up: Channel Guidesand Loading System

Racking Test Set-up: Details of Pinned Frame &Load Application and Measurement

Racking Test Set-up: Displacement MeasurementInstruments

Partition Test Specimen P2

Partition Test Specimen P2: Slippage @Top Runner

Partition Test Specimen P2: Failure @LoadingEnd Stud @Bottom Runner

Partition Test Specimen P2: Typical Slippage @Top Runner

Partition Test Specimen P2A: Typical Failure atEnd Stud

Partition Test Specimen P2A: Typical Stud Failure

Partition Test Specimen P2A: Typical InteriorStud Failure

Partition Test Specimen P2A: Gypboard Failure @Interior Face

v;;

B-21

B-22

B-23

B-24

B-25

C-l

C-l

C-2

C-2

C-3

C-3

C-4

C-4

C-5

C-5

C-6

C-6

No. Page


Fi g. 52

Fi g. 53

Fig. 54

Fig. 55

Fig. 56

Fi g. 57

Fi g. 58

Fi g. 59

Fig. 60

Fig. 61

Fig. 62

Fi g. 63

Fi g. 64

Fig. 65

Fig. 66

Fi g. 67

Fig. 68

Fig. 69

Fi g. 70

Partition Test Specimen P2A: Typical ScrewDeformation @ End of Test

Partition Test Specimens P3 and P3A

Typical Uplift Restraint Strap PartitionTest Specimen P3A


Partltion Test Specimen P3: Typical Failure @Top Runner

Partition Test Specimen P3A: Typical Slippage @Vertical Joint and Wrinkling of Gypboard @ Failure


Partition Specimen P4: Typical Slippage Failure @Horizontal Joint

Partition Specimen P4: Gypboard Failure @ End Stud


Partition Test Specimen P5: Typical SlippageFailure @Vertical Joint

Partition Test Specimen P5: Typical Slippage @Vertical Joint

Partition Test Specimen P5: Typical Damage @Screw Location @Vertical Joint

Partition Test Specimen P5: Uplift RestraintStrap


Partition Test Specimen P6: Separation ofGypboard &End Stud @ Failure

Partition Test Specimens P5 &P6: Typical BoltHole Deformations @ Uplift Restraint Strap



viii

C-7

C-7

C-8

C-9

C-9

C-10

C-10

C-11

C-li

C-12

C-12

C-13

C-13

C-14

C-14

C-15

C-16

C-17

C-17

No. Page


Fig. 88 Partition Test Specimen Pll : Failure AboveDoor Opening C-28

Fig. 89 Partition Test Specimen Pll : Failure AboveDoor Openi ng C-28



x

\ .

1. INTRODUCTION

This report documents the exploratory experimental studies carried

out to study the behaviour of non-structural building partitions under

horizontal racking loads.

The detailed background. scope and objectives of this research program

were described in a previous report (14}1. The main purpose of the research

program is to attempt to understand the behaviour of non-structural build

ing partitions during earthquakes. The fundamental characteristics of

building partitions governing their seismic behaviour are their mass.

lateral stiffness. energy-absorption capacity and strength. These basic

properties, once determined, then provide the necessary data for developing

rational methods of assessing the effect of non-structural building parti

tions on the seismic response behaviour of buildings. Studies of building

damage during recent earthquakes clearly indicate that the participation

of non-structural partitions can significantly alter the lateral stiffness

and energy absorption properties of the building earthquake resisting

system. These effects then change the building seismic response behaviour

and the time history of damageability.

The two major factors affecting the seismic behaviour of non

structural building partitions including their interaction with the

primary lateral force resisting system during earthquakes are:

INumbers in parenthesis refer to list of references on page 30.

1

2

o Relative Inter-story Displacement (Drift) Effects

o Vibrational Effects

The role of drift limits in the seismic design of buildings, including

their relation to non-structural damage, has been reported by Teal (16) and

recently by Freeman (8).

The emphasis in this investigation is on the study of the effects of

relative inter-story displacement (drift) on partition behaviour during

earthquakes.

3

2. SCOPE AND OBJECTIVES

The objectives of this experimental research program are as follows:

a. To study the correlation between horizontal inter-story

relative displacement (drift) and building partition

behaviour under horizontal racking loads.

b. To attempt to assess the threshold levels of partition

damage during horizontal racking actions.

c. To determine the fundamental characteristics of non

structural building partitions, e.g., stiffness, energy

absorption capacity and strength, under horizontal

racking actions, similar to those imposed upon these

components during earthquakes.

Parameters included in this study are as follows:

(i) Geometry of partition configuration

o Height/width ratio

o Full-height vs. Partial-height partition

o Door openings (wood door frame vs. metal door frame)

o Window opening

(ii) Placement of gypsum wallboard panels:

o vertically

o horizontally

(iii) Connection details at boundaries and @ openings

(iv) Taped vs. untaped joints between gypsum

wallboard facing panels

(v) History of loading

(vi) Joint-slip at interface between gypsum wallboard

facing panels

4

5

3. DEVELOPMENT OF TESTING PROGRAM

The building partitions selected for this investigation are those

typically representative of non-load bearing partitions in buildings of

different occupancies. Temporary partitions for dividing interior spaces

in buildings are excluded from this study.

3.1 Review of Current Design and Detailing Practices

According to current design practice, the bare structural system of

a building is designed to resist the entire earthquake forces with the

objective that the building should survive a moderate earthquake with minor

damage and a severe earthquake without catastrophic structural collapse.

Non-structural building partitions are considered to contribute

only to the gravity load of the building and their contribution, if any,

to the stiffness, damping and other properties of the primary structural

system, is neglected.

According to current design practice, detailing of architectural

building partitions is based on the objective of dynamically uncoupling

them from the primary structural system. The two systems are then treated

separately in the building seismic design process.

Building partition assembly configurations are at present based

on the following:

o architectural requirements

o fire-resistance rating criteria

o sound control criteria

6

Fisher (5) and others (2), (11), (3) have presented architectural

details of building partition assemblies currently in use in multi-story

buildings.

A survey of building partition detailing and installation practices

indicates a wide variability in these practices. For instance, gypsum

wallboard panels may be placed vertically or horizontally. Connection

details also vary considerably. This is due to a general lack of codes

and regulatory standards governing the seismic design and detailing of

architectural building partitions and other non-structural components.

The few codes and standards governing the earthquake resistant design of

architectural (non-structural) building components are as follows:

o Uniform Building Code, 1979 Edition (20)

o Lateral Force Requirements of SEAOC (15)

o Title 21 Requirements - Schools (17)

o Title 24 Requirements - Hospitals (18)

o Tri-Services Manual (19)

o Tentative Provisions for the Development of Seismic

Regulations for Buildings ATC 3-06 (1)

o Veterans Administration Handbook H-08-8 (24)

Two buildings under construction on this University campus, the five-story

R. E. Kennedy Library Building and the new Faculty Office Building were

also visited during the initial phase of this investigation to obtain

additional first-hand information on the installation details of non-load

bearing partitions in buildings.

A broad overview of development of building systems and components

has been provided by Merritt (12). Graphic presentation of fire-resistive

7

details of building component assemblies in accordance with the provisions

of the Uniform Building Code, Gypsum Association and I.C.B.O. Research

Committee recommendations has been presented by Przetak (13).

It is observed that at this time the connection details and for

installation of non-structural building partitions are based on local

building trade practices and do not take into account dynamic effects of

earthquakes.

3.2 Partition Test Specimens

3.2.1. General

The partitions selected for this testing program are typical

non-load-bearing metal-stud partitions with fire-rated gypsum wallboard

as facing material. The partition assembly, in addition, consists of

horizontal metal runners at base and at top, with the bottom runner

connected to the structural floor. The metal runner at top is also

attached to the structural floor (in case of full height partitions with

out suspended ceiling) or fastened to a braced suspended ceiling assembly.

A schematic diagram of a non-structural building partition is shown on

page 8.

The numerous interface conditions between building partitions and

ceilings, as well as those between such building components and the

primary structural system, have been documented by McCue et al. (11) in

their recent research into the development of conceptual models of inter

action of building components during earthquakes.

Recommendations of U.S. Gypsum for steel-framed drywall systems

(10), (23) have also been used as an important source of guidance for

selection of connection details and installation of building partitions.

Runner

Gypboard

8

DIAGRAM I

SCHEMATIC DIAGRAM OF BUILDING PARTITION ASSEMBLY

9

It should also be noted that installation details recommended by the Gypsum

Association (9) provide for perimeter relief systems at top and at structural

column/wall junctions.

3.2.2. Description of Partition Test Specimens

A detailed description of the partition specimens tested is presented

in Table I.

The details of the partition test specimens, as built, are given in

Appendix A (Fig. 3 to Fig. 14). All the specimens included in this testing

program were 8 1 -0" wide and 8'-0" high. Trial specimen PI was a plywood

partit ion with 2x4 wood studs wi th 3/8" plywood as faci ng material on both

sides of the partition. Testing of this trial specimen was intended to

check out the load application and measurement systems used in the racking

tests of building partitions.

Partition test specimens P2 through P9 were constructed with

3-5/8 inch wide-25 gage metal studs while specimens PI0 and PI1 were built

using 2-1/2 inch wide-25 gage metal studs. The facing material in all

specimens was a single layer of 5/8 inch thick type X-fire-rated gypsum

wallboard, on both sides of the partitions. The fasteners used for attach

ment of the gypsum wallboard to the partition framing were 1 inch type S

drywall screws (10), (23).

Typically, all the specimens were attached at base, free at the

vertical sides, whereas the connection details at top varied from specimen

to specimen. Partition test specimens P2 through P3A, P5 and P6 were all

partitions without openings, with gypsum wallboard placed vertically.

Unique features of this group of specimens may be identified as follows:

TABLE I. DESCRIPTION OF PARTITION TEST SPECIMENS.

10

Part it ion Facing Date ofNo. Size/Ft. Materi a1 Studs Opening Remarks Test

Pl 8 x 8 3/8" plywood 2 x 4 None Tri a1 specimen only. 8/79wood

P2 8 x 8 5/8" gypsum 3-5/8" None Facing panels placed 10/79wall board metal vertically. Taped joints.

Connection of studs torunner at top by frictiononly.

P2A 8 x 8 5/8" gypsum 3-5/8 11 None Same as P2, except 10/79wall board metal connection between gyp-

board and runner at topby drywall screws at16" o.c.

P3 8 x 8 5/8" gypsum 3-5/8" None Same as P2, except no gap 10/79wall board metal between studs and runner

at top. Joints not taped.

P3A 8 x 8 5/8 11 gypsum 3-5/8" None Same as P2A, except no gap 10/79wallboard metal between studs and runner

at top. Joints not taped.

?4 8 x 8 5/8" gypsum 3-5/8" None Facing panels placed hori- 10/79wallboard metal zonta lly. Connection

between gypboard and runnerat top by d~ywall screwsat 16" o.c. Joints nottaped.

P5 8 x 8 5/8" gypsum 3-5/8" None Facing panels placed 11/79wall board metal vert i ca lly. Joints not

taped. Different dry-wall screw layout.

P6 8 x 8 5/8" gypsum 3-5/8" None Same as P5 except joints 11/79wallboard metal are taped and different

screw layout is used.

P7 8 x 8 5/8" gypsum 3-5/8" Door 3'-0" x 6'-8" door opening. 1/80wallboard metal opening Wooden door frame.

P8 8 x 8 5/8" gypsum 3-5/8" None Partial height partition. 1/80overall wa 11 board metal Height of gypboard = 6'-0".

Facing panels placed verti-cally. Taped joints.Connection of studs torunner at top by frictiononly.

Partition FacingNo. Size/Ft. Material Studs Opening Remarks Date

P8A 8 x 8 5/8" gypsum 3-5/8" None Condition similar to P8 2/80wall board metal except studs fully

covered. Joints taped.

pg 8 x 8 5/8" gypsum 3-5/8" Window 3'-0" x 3'-0" window 3/80wallboard metal opening: wooden frame.

P10 8 x 8 5/8" gypsum 2-1/2" Door 2'-8" x 6'-8" door 5/80wa 11 board metal opening: metal door

frame: gypboard placedhorizontally.

Pll 8 x 8 5/8" gypsum 2-1/2" Door 21-8" x 6'-8" door open- 4/80wall board metal ing: metal door frame:

9ypboard placed verti-cally.

11

o small gap (1/8 inch) between the ends of studs and top

runner (P2 and P2A only)

o connection of studs to top runner by friction only

(P2 and P3)

o connection between gypboard and top runner by drywall

screws at 16" o.c. (P2A and P3A only)

o taped joints between gypboard facing panels (P2, P2A)

o untaped joints between gypboard facing panels (P3, P3A)

Starting with partition specimen P3A it was decided to provide uplift

restraint steel straps at base at each end of partition. See Figure 2 for

details.

Partition specimen P5 was similar to specimen P3A, except for dif

ferent screw fastener layout at edges and at joint between gypboard facing

panels. Partition P6 was similar to specimen P5 except the joints were

taped. Partition Specimen P4 was similar to P3A except that gypboard is

placed horizontally.

Partition specimens with openings were P7. P9, PIO and PII. In all

these specimens joints were taped. Partition specimens P7 and P9 had

wood-framed door and window openings, respectively, and 3-5/8 inch wide

25 gage metal studs. Gypboard was placed vertically in these specimens.

Specimens PI0 and Pl1 had door openings with metal door-frames and

2-1/2 inch wide-25 gage metal partition studs. Gypboard was placed ver

tically in partition specimen PII, whereas it was placed horizontally in

speciman PIO.

Partition specimen P8 was a partial height partition with an overall

size of 8 ft. x 8 ft., with height of gypboard being 6 feet from the base.

12

Wooden blocking was added at top edge of gypboard, between the studs.

Gypboard was placed vertically, and joints were taped. Connection of studs

to top runner was by friction only.

Partition specimen P8A (Fig. 11) was similar to P8, except that

additional pieces of gypboard were used to fully cover the partition studs.

All joints were taped. Screw connection was added between gypboard, studs

and top runner.

3.3. Racking Test Method

3.3.1. Testing Frame

The basic description of the test frame was presented in a previous

report (14). The loading frame was designed and built for conducting tests

of building partitions under in-plane horizontal racking loads. Details

of the test frame are given in Figures I, 2, 40 and 41. The loading test

frame has a clear span of 14 feet and is bolted to the 4'-0" thick floor

slab in the high-bay laboratory of the School of Architecture.

To simulate the type of horizontal racking experienced by building

partitions between adjacent floors, during earthquakes, a pin-connected

frame was fabricated. This pinned-frame consists of two horizontal struc

tural steel channels (one at top and the other at base and bolted to floor

slab) and two pairs of vertical structural steel tubing (one pair at either

end of the horizontal channels). This concept of the use of pinned frame

is similar to that first used by Bouwkamp and Meehan (4) to investigate

the drift limits imposed by glass in buildings. A modified design of the

pinned frame concept was used in the racking tests reported by Freeman,

(21), (22), (6), (7). There are 2x4 wood plates bolted to the

horizontal channel members of the pinned-frame. Partition metal runners

13

are screw attached to these 2x4 wood plates. Thus the partition test

specimens are positioned inside the pinned frame, connected at top and

bottom only, with the vertical sides free.

Racking load is applied by means of a hand-pumped, double-acting

hydraulic jack, connected at one and to the top channel of the pinned

frame and to the vertical W12x27 of test frame at the other end. The

pinned frame is guided to move freely in the horizontal direction by four

short-length pieces of structural steel channels, welded to the top channel

of pinned frame, with their top flange free to slide on the bottom flange

of the W8x28 cross beam spanning between the vertical W12x27 members of

the test frame (Fig. 2, Fig. 40 and Fig. 41).

3.3.2. System for Application and Measurement of Loads

and Displacements

A block diagram (p. 15) shows the general layout of the racking

load application and measurement system. The racking load was applied by

means of a hand-pumped, ENERPAC double-acting push-pull type of hydraulic

jack (model RD 2510). The racking load was monitored by a BLH universal

load-cell (model U3G2) connected to a BLH digital read-out unit. The BLH

digital read-out unit consists of BLH digital strain indicator (model 1200)

plus a BLH switching and balancing unit (model 1225).

All displacements were monitored by dial gages reading to the

nearest 0.001 inch. Initially, it was planned to use LVDT's for displace

ment measurements but due to lack of operable read-out devices, it was

decided to use dial gages instead.

The load application and measurement system was calibrated as

recommended by BLH for using the digital read-out unit for measuring the

14

UniversalBLH Model

Cable

Cell

Hose

15

Double-Acting, Push-Pull JackEn erpac RD-2510

Top Channel MC7x19.1Pinned-Frame Assembly&Partition Specimen

Press ure

BLHDigital StrainIndi cator

Model 1200

Gage

Manual Pump

BLHSwitchi rig &Balancing Unit

Model 1225

DIAGRAM II

LOAD-APPLICATION &MEASUREMENTSYSTEM

16

output of a strain-gage type force transducer (load-cell). A conversion

factor for relating the digital read-out to the magnitude of load level at

any instant of time, was thus obtained.

3.3.3. Testing Procedure

The racking test procedure was generally similar to that used by

Freeman (21). Partition specimens were subjected to two complete cycles of

loading for each increasing level of peak horizontal displacement starting

with 1/16 inch, 1/8 inch, 1/4 inch, 3/8 inch, 1/2 inch and then loaded to

fail ure.

All the specimens were erected in-place inside the pinned frame of

the racking test set-up. Specimens with taped joints were allowed to dry

for 24 hours before the start of the test.

At the start of the racking test all the measuring instruments were

initialized. The racking test of each specimen began by pushing the spec-

imen in the forward cycle and readings of load vs. deflections taken at suitable

intervals until the desired magnitude of peak displacement was reached.

The specimen was then racked through the unloading part of the forward

cycle, with data being manually recorded. After noting the displacement

at zero load the specimen was pulled through the reverse cycle and readings

of loads and displacements were recorded until the desired peak displace

ment was reached in this part of the cycle. The specimen was then taken

through the unloading part of the reversal cycle, with data being recorded

as before. Upon drop of the load level to zero was defined as one complete

cycle of loading with its associated peak level of displacement. For each

increasing level of peak horizontal displacement the partition specimen

was subjected to two complete cycles of racking, as described above.

17

During each displacement cycle of the racking tests, observed behaviour

of the partition test specimens was recorded. Special attention was directed

to record the threshold levels of partition damage, as the test progressed.

Photographs of the partition test specimens were taken during the

racking tests and also after the completion of the tests.

18

4. TEST RESULTS

The results of racking tests of building partitions may be categorized

as fo 11 ows:

Load-Displacement Curves

Upon reduction of the raw test data, load vs. displacement curves

were plotted and are presented in Appendix B (Fig. 15 - Fig. 37). For each

partition specimen the load vs. displacement curves for each cycle of rack

ing have been manually plotted. The trial specimen PI was subjected to

three cycles of loading with a limiting value of load level, arbitrarily

selected as a cut-off point for each cycle (Fig. 15). The data thus ob

tained provided guidance for the metal-stud partition tests that followed.

Except for specimens P2, P2A, P3 and P8, two graphs of load

displacement curves are presented for each specimen. Starting with

specimen P3A, the first graph is a larger scale plot of load-displacement

curves for 1/16 inch and 1/8 inch peak-displacement cycles (e.g., Fig. 19).

The remaining cycles of loading corresponding to 1/4 inch, 3/8 inch,

1/2 inch ... peak-displacement levels are plotted separately on a second

graph of load-displacement curves (e.g., Fig. 20).

For partition specimens P2, P2A, P3 and P8, a single graph showing

all the load-displacement curves associated with the various cycles of

loading, was plotted for each specimen (Figures 16, 17, 18,29).

A comparison of the average peak load associated with corresponding

peak-displacement of cycle, was made for the partition test specimens

P2-Pl1, and the results are shown in Fig. 39. The average peak load was

19

defined as the average of the peak load in the forward and reversed portions

of each cycle.

Energy Absorbed by Partion Test Specimens

An important aspect of the racking test program is to comparatively

evaluate the energy absorbed by the partition test specimens during the

various cycles of loading.

Energy absorbed by the partition test specimen was defined as the

area under the load-displacement curve for each cycle of loading. The areas

under the load-displacement curves were determined by using a planimeter,

and thus the total amount of energy absorbed during the various peak

displacement cycles of loading was found for each of the partition

specimens. P2-Pl1.

These results are presented in Fig. 38 in the form of graphs of

energy absorbed vs. peak-displacement of cycle for the various partition

test specimens.

20

5. DISCUSS ION OF TEST RESULTS

The racking tests of building partition specimens were essentially

static cyclic tests, since it took at least thirty minutes to rack the

specimen through one complete cycle of loading. The reasons for this were

that a hand-pumped hydraulic jack was used and the test data of load and

displacements (dial gage readings at several locations) had to be recorded

manually at preselected load intervals until the peak-displacement of cycle

was reached.

The results presented are based on the test of a single specimen of

each type of building partition. For this reason these racking tests should

be regarded as exploratory only. The consistency of the test results can

only be confirmed by testing at least two or three specimens of each type

of building partition.

The general pattern of partition behaviour (Fig. I5-Fig. 39) agrees

with the test results reported by Freeman (21), in that the load and dis

placement are zero only at the start of the first cycle of loading,

thereafter when the load is dropped to zero the specimen does not return to

its original position and it has to be loaded in the reverse direction to

bring it to a state of zero displacement. This is due to the fact that

the partition specimens do not behave in a perfectly elastic manner. Thus

the load-displacement curves of partitions pass through the abscissae and

ordinates at points other than the origin during all cycles after the start

of the test.

21

An examination of the load-displacement curves for partition specimens

P2 and P3 (Fig. 16, Fig. 18) indicates a lack of consistency between the

loops corresponding to the various cycles of loading, as compared to the

results obtained for specimens P2A, P3A ... (Fig. 17, Fig. 19 ... ). This

is influenced by the details of construction used and also due to the fact

that during the racking tests of partition specimens P2, P2A and P3, uplift

restraint straps had not been installed.

For all specimens P3A-Pll, two upl i ft restrai nt steel straps were

installed at base, one at each end of the partition (see Fig. 2 for details).

This seems to have improved the consistency of test resuHs. For all

partitions starting with specimen P3A, the comparison of the load-displace

ment curves (Fig. 19 to Fig. 37) for each of the two cycles of loading for

each level of peak-horizontal displacement, shows a general pattern of

behaviour. It is believed that a larger number of cycles (3-5) of loading

is necessary for each peak-displacement level to establish better consist

ency of results. The choice of the selected procedure (two cycles of

loading per level of peak displacement) was necessitated by the limitations

imposed by the hand-pumped jacking system and manual recording of test

data.

The partial height partition specimen P8 was subjected to a portion

of one complete cycle (Fig. 10). This was due to the flexibility of the

upper part of the partition and it took only a load of approximately

230 lbs. to achieve a displacement of 3/8 inch. Furthermore, this partition

was built so that connection between gypboard and runner was by friction

only. Once the effect of friction was overcome, the specimen would find

it difficult to hold the load level. This same type of behaviour was also

observed for specimen P2.

22

The stiffness values of the partition specimens can be found from the

load-displacement curves for the various levels of peak-displacement. The

partition stiffness may be defined as a tangent-stiffness at selected points

of a given cycle and on this basis, a composite average stiffness value may

be determined for the cycles with their associated level of peak-displacement.

A study of Fig. 38 shows that for all partition specimens, the energy

absorbed during the various cycles of loading increases with the level of

the peak horizontal displacement. An evaluation of relative strengths of

partition specimens can be obtained from Fig. 39. It is found that for all

specimens, the average peak load during the various cycles of loading

increases with the level of peak horizontal displacement.

The effect of vertical vs. horizontal placement of gypboard can be

studied by comparing the results for specimens P3A and P4. Fig. 38 shows

that for peak-displacement levels greater than approximately 3/16 inch,

the specimen with horizontally placed gypboard (P4) absorbed greater amount

of energy than that absorbed by the specimen with vertically placed gyp

board (P3A). Fig. 39 shows that for levels of peak displacement up to

approximately 3/8 inch the average peak loads for specimen P4 were higher

than those for specimen P3A.

The effect of untaped vs. taped joints between gypboard facing panels

can be studied by examining the results for partition specimens P5 and P6

( Fi g. 38 and Fi g. 39).

A study of the effect of door and window openings on partition

behaviour (Fig. 38 and Fig. 39) indicates that, in general, the specimens

with openings (specimens P7, P9, PIO and PII) absorbed lesser energy than

the other specimens and, furthermore, the average peak loads for the

23

specimens with openings were lower than other specimens, at all levels of

peak-displacement.

The comparison of horizontal vs. vertical placement of gypboard in

specimens with a metal door frame (Specimens PIC and PII) shows that specimen

PIC with horizontally placed gypboard absorbed greater amounts of energy

than specimen PI1 which had vertically applied gypboard. The average peak

loads for specimen PIC were also higher than those for specimen PII at all

levels of peak displacement.

The observations of partition damage were recorded and photographs

taken during the progress of the racking tests. All photographs are pre

sented in Appendix C (Fig. 40 to Fig. 91). The only exception is partition

PIa for which photographs could not be taken for inclusion in this report.

The highlights of observations of partition performance during these

racking tests are presented in Table II.

TABLE II. GENERAL OBSERVATIONS OF PARTITION PERFORMANCE

24

Peak Displacement of Cycles

Partition Fi rst Creaki ng Louder Creaki ng First Indication Fai 1ure/Specimen Noise Noise/Popping of Noticeable Si gnifi cant

(Ref. Table I) @ Sounds @ Damage @ Damage @

P2A 1/811 - upl i ft @ 1eft 0.8"stud @ 3/811

P3 1/32" 1/16" - -

P3A 1/16" 1/8" 3/8" 0.6"

P4 1/16" 1/811 1/4"noticeable hori- 111zontal joint-slip

/

P5 1/16" 1/8" - 1/4" 3/8" - 1/2" I" - 1-1/4"noticeable joints1i p. Sounds ofscrews slippingor readjusting.

P6 1/16" 1/8" - 1/4" 1/2" 3/4"

P7 - 1/411 - 3/8" 3/811 - 1/2" I"

P8 - - 3/8" -P8A - - 1/411 - 3/8" 1/2" - 0.7"

P9 - 3/8" 3/811 1-1/16"cracks in gyp-board @ cornersof opening.

P10 - - 3/811 0.7"

Pll - - 3/811 0.7"

25

6. SOURCES OF ERROR

One source of error may be the deflection of the reaction frame.

The first trial partition specimen Pl was progressively subjected to a

maximum racking load of 1800 pounds. Visually no reaction frame deflection

was noticeable. Even though no specific studies were undertaken to

investigate the deflection of the reaction frame, it is believed that any

possible errors should be within permissable limits.

The uplift restraint straps were installed starting with specimen

P3A. Therefore, the lack of uplift restraint straps in the specimens

PI, P2, P2A and P3 is a source of error in these specimens~

The hydraulic jacking system and associated controls may really be

described as unsophisticated and needing further refinement. There may

be errors associated with the lack of accurate controls of loads and

displacements during the racking tests.

Another source of error is the difference between the real conditions

in the field and attempts to simulate these conditions in the laboratory.

Lastly, human error inherent in recording and interpretation of

test data of partition performance, is also a source of error.

7. PRELIMINARY CONCLUSIONS

Based on the exploratory racking tests carried out, the following

preliminary conclusions may be drawn:

26

Thresholds of Partition Damage

Creaking noises/popping sounds, as one indicator of partition dis

tress, occur at peak relative displacement levels between 1/16" and 1/4".

These correspond to drift/height ratios of 0.0007-0.0026.

The first noticeable partition damage is found to occur at cycles

of loading with a peak relative displacement level of 3/8". This initial

damage must be regarded as permanent damage that would still be noticeable

even after the specimen is brought back to its original position. The

resulting drift/height ratio is 0.0039.

Failure of the partition specimens with accompanying greater

damage was found to occur when the peak-relative displacements were greater

than 1/2 inch which corresponds to a drift/height ratio of 0.0052.

Partition Stiffness

The partition specimens exhibit non-linear behaviour with the

progression of the cycles of loading. The stiffness of building partitions

can be obtained from the load-displacement curves, as tangent-stiffnesses

at selected control points of a given cycle which may then be used to

define a composite average stiffness for the displacement cycle under

consideration. Building partition stiffness values, thus obtained, will

provide a rational basis to estimate the fundamental time-period of the

27

building partitions, and also to determine the contribution of such building

components to the stiffness of the primary lateral force resisting system

of a building.

Energy Absorbed by Building Partitions

For all specimens the amount of energy absorbed for all cycles of

loading was found to increase with the level of peak-relative displacement.

It was discovered that partitiGn assembly and connection details of par

tition configurations significantly influence the energy absorption

characteristics of building partitions. For instance, building partitions

with horizontal placement of gypboard absorb greater amounts of energy

compared to partitions with gypboard placed vertically, at all levels of

relative displacement. The amount of energy absorbed by partitions with

openings (e.g., doors, windows) is lower than that absorbed by partitions

without openings.

Details of Partition Assembly and Connection Details

The details of partition assembly and connection details significantly

influence the behaviour of building partitions under horizontal racking

loads. This is evident from a comparative study of the resulting load

displacement curves, and comparison of the amount of energy absorbed by

various partition specimens at increasing levels of relative-displacement.

28

8. PLANS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH

The racking tests of building partitions, reported herein, have

been, in fact, static cyclic tests. It is necessary to better simulate

the earthquake dynamic environment experienced by building partitions.

Therefore, it is planned to conduct a series of dynamic cyclic tests of

building partitions, using an electro-hydraulic closed-loop system for

applying loads and displacements at controlled rates. When this dynamic

testing system is made operational, it should be possible to vary the

amplitude and frequency of applied loads and displacements with respect

to time. The results of such dynamic racking tests should provide more

realistic data needed to improve our understanding of partition behaviour,

fundamental characteristics (e.g., stiffness and energy absorption

capacity and therefore damping) and thresholds of partition damage.

Under this dynamic racking test program, current practices of seismic

design and detailing of non-structural building partitions can be evaluated

more realistically.

It is planned to evaluate the racking test arrangement used in the

current experimental program and make modifications necessary to improve

the laboratory simulation of the field conditions at boundaries of building

partitions. The racking test programs reported to-date have all used

standard 8 ft. x 8 ft. specimens as recommended by ASTM Standards E72 and

E564-76.

There is a need to study the dynamic behaviour of building partitions

of other geometric configurations (different width-to-height ratios)

commonly found in the field and the following parameters:

o conditions at partition-suspended ceiling interface,

and at partition-structure interface

o intersecting partitions

o horizontal vs. vertical placement of facing panels

o single vs. double layers of facing panels

o door and window openings (wood frame vs. metal frame

@opening)

o effect of joint-slip between facing panels

Tests reported to-date have all been in-plane racking tests. Thus

it is planned to study the out-of-plane behaviour of building partition

assemblies under cyclic loading.

29

30

REFERENCES

1. Applied Technology Council, "Tentative Provisions for the Developmentof Seismic Regulations for Buildings," ATC 3-06, Chapter 8 (p. 77)and Commentary, p. 409.

2. Ayres, J. Marx, Sun, T-Y, and Brown, Frederick, "Non-Structural Damageto Buildings, The Great Alaska Earthquake of 1964: Engineering,National Academy of Sciences, Washington, D.C., 1973.

3. Berry, O.R., Architectural Seismic Detailing, Proceedings, InternationalConference on Planning and Design of Tall Buildings, Lehigh University,Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, 1972, pp. 1115-1129.

4. Bouwkamp, J.G. and Meehan, J.F., Drift Limitations Imposed by Glass,Second World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Vol. III, 1960,pp. 1763-1776.

5. Fisher, John L., Seismic Design: Architectural Systems and Components:Summer Seismic Institute for Architectural Faculty, Stanford University,August 1-12, 1977, pp. 125-151.

6. Freeman, S.A., Third Progress Report on Racking Tests of Wall Panels,URS/John A. Blume &Associates, Engineers, JAB-99-54, San Francisco,November 1971.

7. Freeman, S.A., Fourth Progress Report on Racking Tests of Wall Panels,URS/John A. Blume &Associates, Engineers, JAB-99-55, San Francisco,September 1974.

8. Freeman, S.A., Drift Limits: Are They Realistic?, Structural Moments,No.4, Structural Engineers Association of Northern California,May 1980.

9. Gypsum Association, Fire Resistance Design Manual, 1978 Edition,Evanston, Illinois.

10. Gypsum Construction Handbook, U.S. Gypsum, 1978.

11. McCue, G.M., Skaff, Ann and Boyce, J.W., Architectural Design ofBuilding Components for Earthquakes: A report on research conductedby MBT Associates, San Francisco, California under a grant from theNational Science Foundation; McCue, Boone &Tomsick, Architects,San Francisco, California, 1978.

12. Merritt, Frederick S., Building Engineering and System Design, VanNostrand Reinhold Co., New York, 1979.

31

13. Przetak, Louis, Standard Details for Fire-Resistive Building Construction,McGraw Hill Book Co., 1977.

14. Rihal, Satwant S., The Behaviour and Design of Architectural (nonstructural) Building Components to Resist Earthquakes, Internal StudyReport, Architectural Engineering Department, School of Architectureand Environmental Design, California Polytechnic State University,San Luis Obispo, October 1979; Report submitted to the National ScienceFoundation.

15. SEAOC, Recommended Lateral Force Requirements and Commentary, StructuralEngineers Association of California, 1974.

16. Teal, LJ., Seismic Drift Control Criteria, Engineering Journal, AISC,Second Quarter 1975, pp. 56-67.

17. Title 21 Regulations, State of California (Schools), Register 78, No. 22,1978.

18. Title 24 Building Standards, State of California (Hospitals), Register79, No. 41, 1979.

19. Tri-Services Manual, "Seismic Design for Buildings," Department of theArmy, the Navy and the Air Force, April 1973.

20. Uniform Building Code, 1979 Edition, International Conference ofBuilding Officials.

21. URS/John A. Blume &Associates, Engineers, First Progress Report onRacking Tests of Wall Panels, NVO-99-15, San Francisco, August 1966.

22. URS/John A. Blume &Associates, Engineers, Second Progress Report onRacking Tests of Wall Panels, JAB-99-35, San Francisco, July 1968.

23. U.S. Gypsum, Steel-Framed Drywall Systems, System folder SA-923, 1979.

24. Veterans Administration, Handbook H-08-8. Earthquake Resistant DesignRequirements for VA Hospital Facilities. Office of Construction,Veterans Administration. Washington. D.C. 20420.

APPENDIX A

DRAWINGS OF TEST FRAME ANDPARTITION TEST SPECIMENS

.~-J

L...'

__'I

I""

~_~

~.1'

-+

----~~=

-=_-

-:lt

i~~.

_.--

-J--

_--6

1-_~

~=tW

12"2

1

tL

~'~~',

'l~!

-..

WI'2

....2

1

/-w

~'1

..8

-.--

1?1~l-

t11'1

£1e

f1C,

1•

1.,.1

·-~

I3~~~~

x14

a<Td

E'G

-

P\iJ

NW

fVM

EI I I I

;j I I It1

1"'1

1.1·

~+-I

"",

.\

---

L()A

D(.

.fl.L

tl'f(

'I:"I

iW:

JrrA

'

---t04~!7.+

NI2

''''1

-----.-

.l' , I

iJl ..

~ ~I

2..

-CE

Ho

.?

'1'/1'2

"'IS

2L3

',;'

)\)'

___~

~:I.

e"--

--J

c"~I"

,~--

.-

'II12

•2.1

----

-

WI1~'Z1

b IS

IDE

EiE

V6T

ION

jJ<

Ot'l

rt:L

EVAT

ION

c..

.

YQrE:~

I.E

)(C

Ef'T

.N7

lJ~TED

PIA

8iJ

OL

!!l

"'.Ec

""lo

.'S.

2·

l'£H

iiJ6

f\.A

'£13

,ApE

if+,

$fE

6LIt

HIt-

!.3.

"<?t

JiJE

tfl<

?iJt

;!"1

....,e

Wi!¥

,'4'A

ND

~4'4'A~l

BoL

Ts;.

W&e

Of

'8W

_

~I_Q,I

~~'-o

'lAtJ~t1~-~

!:OlT

~FID

IjJfloo~

\

..

.

f:.A

Ol"l

tJG

LO

.......D

rE~rG

of

F'1"fl

-T1T

lr.)N

G

~1.C

i·_l

rLA

tJ.

test;

fra

nn

e~tt

.1-1~r:

'111

2"45M0£~

/''II

1'2,>(

':2.1

v'f;ItTI~--~_

/

W~"'J.b

I'>

€M

rl~iJEDf~E:

~e,J~~

WIt.

"1-1

~~e.:

.V'

~

~

~r' ~.x"-~ %

~~ ~1L

~"-..J ~

~ ~6

I~ ~

to Ill~

Q..

)(

:::>

-1

W)r£..'X.

"'Q..~

¥J.~ ~~

r!...

- t~

~

I . i::X ~0'0

~ ~i

!~

II ~

!I

-zI ~2f\ i I

~":t

IUJ

i~~~

C I ~~ a

.~~~dl I "i

~~-~ ~ , ~~

I

~I Q)

x ~~ ~~ : ~~~ -~ ~

~~ t-U- I

0~ ~~ I

FI ~I

,:

I -=~

"

I ~

II

-to

~I

II

~

~

IJ

~

II fD

~

I

.~: ""

)C

'f

~~

_I\J

l~

(J

~~

Z

~

~

"1- ~fi

to..

)(\-$

lQ

I~~I

!i~~

c: x

L~~'lC:::.~

d C\!

,tt-z.lL

81 -.

::'"

711

b~d-rHk:

;;Kt1.

'(~oI'~'

I.•.

rM-l~

eort-

/~11?l"i1.

..

...

~~d

Me

7xl~

.1

I-l;;fg~~r1t-Z"x4~W'cVt7~

ANC7

J-fWN~fZ1

Y2dl·~~1'

:h I ())

Ab

I

- '\).

_I

--t~

lr2 '

,

/11

x-'\

w~ti'

I

{",~~"""

fx>l'rC

X'-1~

-rot"

I11

11

1J!:8

dI'W~

-:51~

Wir.

..\

_ll

A

_1

Jl

6)

WAL

LEL

EVAT

iON

~u::

:3/8

-...

1'-oi

l

I16

11:

II

'6!l

--~.

iIb

ll•

'"""-1

-I

1\..1-

..I8

-0

~I)

c~

~/MC7J(1~.1

L-U~(';oL..l5AM~

At)

Atx:

Nr::

Y4.~

fl.a:J~~~lIoN

0.0

0

~:,

Ye

ll=ll-

o•

FIG

.:3

PA

RTI

TIO

NTE

ST

PA

NE

L5

FE

CIM

EN

Pi

:3je!I -r..

.j..-:;..t

<ft~

01'1

d)i4~~

srtJ~

l:5C

;P

Aff

fIT

lON

!1U

HN

Eif'

\~

:G,A

r'~~

"5flJ

C7.S

Iff"ILJNN~~

Ve}

loP

Arl

O~Ol"\.

Yell

)(III

I..A:1

6C-fi

£:.W

Z5e

,)(?

/¥o~

ME'

:IPL.

-iS

fuo.

U'"

>!J

/81l -r"

"i'\""e

xc:i

"(P<5

UM

WAU

,..£X

7Af'l

O.

I"

-~

-()

:::: a -, I{)

WAL

LEL

EVAT

ION

+8'

-011

I1

---

-----I

I~I

OP-

'1W

AW-~~W;S@

1~IO

..::;.l'J~w~

af'

elO

MO

iF'l~NE:1"l

•.

.·n

·.

..

.Zt=

=l-

CP

Z4

~L."

')V4

..:A

1!1

'Af'

IOO

JOIN

Tr.

.tIS

lSlD

e"

I ~ L----+-..f.I------I+--1A~

J£'\

N\~

oNI

..II.

/11

IIII

I~61~

~-~-.'

-'

__i_

MIN

.li0-1

•

iofl

f','5

\sa

o,t!

W8

~fu"

l-II

--l~

.

1!t4.~(Wd,I.L~ws

1=>@

IElid

,.::;,~

"~IcAl-

:)fA

Ni'<

L-~~S

~t>

IVOUN~

~I\

1'0

AM

I~~~

,.(:

)<""

"I"

""

'I.e~u~

----l

.?AM~

ASA

f)O

/[';

n I~

6CA

L.Z;

o/e,

u~

I!...o

'.

.,"

:~2(

.:::.;:

-;"~::'.

~;.",

..,:.':---:-;~y:/"

.;;;:I•

.::'

,.:.

:.~,

"::,,::

~··:

-:·,

·~I

I::;.:

:',i.

".'.

Or

:".-.;:-:~::-":-.:'.'

r:Z;

-;:~

'~~-

ri(i

----

;;-;

::-:

-G-..---

-:i.~:

-;;.~-

.-'-:-

~k··,·

'.".,...;

..,.....,~

,··....·~

Wk;····,;,

,.".'C·.

'..

"..

.:.

~:.

.",I

i..lb~'?l

'_16

U•

-I

II-l

•I

~~-O

•

fI.

ftA

HZ

;A~

Af:X

7\If!

::"~MG

7><I~·1

-2,.

:-4~o

M1'

e~/..-~Tc>~t-.l~

t2d

5?

4?'

zt/1

~Pl

~VA-rIC>N

O,U

O

SE

CTI

ON

.Lt.•

1.

.•

SE

CTI

ON

B6?

AJ.

.e.:

1II2d~I'-011

FIG

.-4

PA

RTI

TIO

NTE

5TP

AN

EL

5FE

CIM

EN

PZ-

+FC

A

'='/8

"c::

1yt?,

SlJh1W~MO

01-.\

B6k.~

Mr:;

-rA

LuT

Wu-

Fk::I

N<:1PAN~~O

VE

.lif\

:::.-\

u;l.

F'2

.;~ll!,:~noH

Of:

511J

O,0

pVN

tJef

\@1

0f

~"(

f¢lc

:rIO

NoN

t:l.

PZ

A;~g

A6

Pe.~PT~N~ON

e>~~N

"11'P

.e

oA

JV

4-,:wtJN~P,

e>"(

1'1..+

11~w:s

eI"

'U<?

,~,

till

IIu

-oM

e.7><1~·1

e'1><

.<tU~

FLA

T!?

~'(~O

10~iJtJEOt-

j[

...~ _I ~

1!tI"""""'U-~

~¢VIk>

eIZ

"tJ,c

:.1

0~l?-)

"INre~-

olA

Te.

-1v

~...

.tll!

e:wti~"'"'"

••

.•ffl

1---'

-~iotJ~I~-

It1~liM~

AtJ

O•

t'llJ

lJtJ

fPI

@It>

~tJ~.

(fD

AG?

NL"1

')

A),

I-'

---t+

-

4-1

\L

--

1:>"

5k!''

f1"f\

;.)<

C1"1

'Po!I

M.

WAU

-tx

::W

'lO

.... ~-I \()

WA

LLEL

EVA

TiO

N~

:~hll-

I'-O~

Ivell

"0ril

'75\::

-::::L

1.~..---L

X-f

'l'F

iW€~llO

L-,'

•_

l-(I-

!¢6.

,

5

:n I (jl

••.••••

!•.~!:.-~

.....-:'~~~;..

.:-.

•~:;

..:..~--:-;-:~

..:•.

._...

.-.-'

...-

.•.•

;.~:.:.

:.~'.:::';

1:::-;.O:.~··..

:·.'.

':-.

-;:..

";:"

.:."

,',:

,'.;.

..~-,-::

....,

,

~:'

'".'..

",lb"

"",~~"

""":",

,,,,,,

,,,,,,

,,.',,

."~

,I~II

'.

,,,'1:1.:

;::,1~li

~..-1

-8

1 -(7"

''':1--

•i

,...

-i'4

----

oA

MI:

>~

IttX7V~

MC

7xl"

·1Z>

Y4-

wa?

C/ftAi~

1/11

Q?L

."fl:O

O'1

?~N~1.-

/-4

_J:I-o

Of'"

la~v'ATION

0.0

0

SE

CT

ION

AS

C;A

J-e.:

Itj~

tl_1

1_01

1S

EC

TIO

NB

~~:

l'kU

...I'-o

"

FIG

.:5

.P

AR

TITI

ON

TES

TP

lIN

EL

SF

EC

IME

NP

3+

F3

A

?/6~

c::1

~VM~w

ON

35~1l

Me

fAL0T

ll~.

F.3

.:~~

A~

P2~ePr

No

4'\

f'ol

'?fV

J~eN

~1lJ

P'u

4~P>

4,J01~

NoT

lAP

eo

.P

M:~I:!

A<5

P2A~

No

<=1A

P~'"/'iIJIa~~lJro

..rzu~~

4JO

IIJIS~

I~P.

..JllJZ~

~wa!:I-

zZelL!-L:\- -~fd[E~

-,l~

... ---I '.-.,; ,

- :;

'.,

:~ q ..(J

z -'.1 ~

0 ~-: ..-"

r :

~~-- ::~r- ~

: -1:$ -0'.:-~

" '- t::l

\J.:~I

-(J

t' ~ :-- ~.r--r-

"-..

zot-~ =~u.J _I

-J'w~....J .,

~ ~

(;?_rJII I~

.'

..

~, I

Ji r-~~~

! j~c ., _1t~ ---I

~~

~-6

II

I~

011

FI

Y2'~

I"/.A

~5&~

ZS

4~TjnotJ

~u,s

t.J5

f"l

l54Y

3g

H£1

AL

S'lV

u

J...

....

5/eJlr

lf'E;X

4'(~

uM\V

AL

l.~D

1"1(

;7X

(f7./

til<~

W'o"

17fLAf~

~~~~w-ro~

.L'~1IlIt:.

rl.

•'"

::: ~ -, 10

~ -.\ CO

!\.JA

LLEL

EVA

llDN

'OQ

\LJ:

:~"'I~ob

IIIY4

-l7P

>YW

ALL

-;"cPi~~e'e

J'a

c·fO

PII

I;7<:::!Ti~

1Y4"

PR

YW

AL.

I..~~\N"flIZI

al:

.V~1"lC.41r'(

IWW

i(WAL

h~~St9I%

o·c.

·

W~~

"@

'6'0

":;.

ViO

f'I(I

~J~IJf.

"b • ......

:····,··,~~T-···'[·':"$a·i'.:.,';

..,....,.,...:.

~•••

'••

',••

~"~I

'•

j."

..'..

'•.

".:.

.',',

'0,'

.,'

.:

••

''"

','••

'."

•••

..'

••

»"

,...

.-'

••'

'.,••,'

••,•

•••

"••

",

\

~10

'-i-

lo;Ia

",j_

,,;II

_~

8'-a

UV~

'. '.

•I:

1S

At-l

f?A

SA

Oo

tf

/'1C.

7><

,,,.1

2~'

W::v

OFlA~

~-rESO

10~~L-

-V

?'U

-:z1o

:fafl

?;b,

..."

c:u:

v,(r

lcN

00

0,2

7~Z

Ii

SC

AL

E;I'

SE

CT

ION

BS

.cA

LIi:

:IV

z.ll=

1~=i1

FICC

. 7PA

RTIT

IC>N

TE~T

PA

NE

LS

PE

CIM

EN

P5

t!S/.s

K~"I'P5UM

o~

t>o/~U

Mt=

:IAL-

51lJ~

.FA

aII.J

.:1,P

At.J"

,L4S~

V~TICAU-Y

'1~

fDP'

.)~(i)~.f'lU~a:>~~~.prvt9

WN~·

JO

iNm

NO

rT~D.

.,

Y2.~)f}

1.0\4~w

Z6t.i

f'AFW

flOrt

f1JiJNtJ~f">

l.?4,

x~0

/6l

1"1e

tAl--

L>lW

'f!

:~II~~~_M

~,

,. =:'1

! :

" " r,1

ft-~~~

AC:OV~

MC

7l<

1")·1

Y4ft=,:..J1,,)v~zrJ

tlJ

f\..

a?

p,

~VAf

lorJ

t'-Q

?

:::r ~ i

WAL

LEL

EVA

TIO

NC

OC

AI-E

::;~/Ol_ll_olI

-.-;

::,-,

::'.-.'~---::-'.

~0

,)~

.~·.

'~.·

':~'

.:.:

''',

.··.

I'':

:·.:

·.·t.

:·,.

.·.'

:"::

.."":

"":."

t,:.t.

.:·..

·l"

:._

·:-:

·l·

.:.~

.-:-

-:-;

-;-·

.·-

..'

.',.

.;.

.:..

:.

I'"181

-tJ~

..I

I-•

..

..

-II-

•;;;:

II

.-,

"I

I

~~';'"

,#''!

",

..~.!=:

"~~"

"';"

"'i~;.

'.'."

..'Ml 1

Iu

jl_.

_.__

____

-=8"

--.....

....=.

.o~

...

Ah

I

IY-+~

0'I1

WA

I-j..-

---'-

{I·

}l

~@.&o,c"

G?.-J

~~~

ie~o~.I.

~~l'e~/..lI

..Ie~

J\

I ~

5EC

TIO

NA

OC

AI-

IS-:

IVt:1

=1'

-ad

SE

CTI

ON

B"S

CoII

~:IV

eic=

l'-o'

FIG

.8

PA

RTI

TIO

NTE

5TP

.LlN

EL

SP

EC

IME

NP

6

SA

Mj;

AS

F!5~

SCof"

IIIoW~~N4'

r.>~d

Af'lO

UN

DA

U-~

ANt?

At"

..lo1N

1':5

)tW

o*'

1N'lS~

1'.~o.

".-W

Ir?ffl\lI~

..~~b~C

yzdx

"f...A

1~~w

e?£1

f"Af'lT

rnO

HI"

lIJI-

IHi:'

"

2.f;

>~y.~6!t>'

Mef

41-

-:=;ro

o

Me

1)(1

.')1

Z')(

o4'

WtJ;

?17

flAre

:~T~1O~N~

!~-[ *'<)

1-:

>'tJ

jo'~

><"1

<P.:S

UMW

Au..~

~~

1::

.:.

z'x'#'

-'~~

... 1" -I "" l() -, I

- t;,)-I lQ.,

....-

1-...

'f}-t

J,1

61 -0

'

I~'

Dl"ll

W,I,U

.~

I..;'

c9e>~c

.,c"

..

\141 \w,l\I.IloU.~

eIt·

.:::.c

.Ves

e:rlc.

Al..4

@!<

OM

?.:::

.~:l

_

)4'e~~

.I4"~)'\Il.I,U.~

I.,

.,,,"'""

0-"

b I ~

'5<:

A!-1

>:

?JhV -

\'-0·

,I

I~E::

Ai>

Ato

i5:=

MC

7xl.

,·t

/'t--I?>z~zknhfa

A..o

oPl

EU

iVA

l'iO

H0

.00

··'·7··

··..···,,·

······C

'"

::..1:•.

.::

::.

I.

....:

....,'.'

......

'.'~t

__~I1:'"

:...

....

.•

e}-O

M----~-I

I"

3-0

"iF

I"

t'"

..,

....

.'.:

·.....

.·.II:

,.:.':,

·..'.·.:

;·,...~.::I

~l£;

fIIe"

=-1

'-0

jSEc

noH

B..

...

FIG

. ~

P~AT'TJ

ON

TE5T

f1:1I

'-1EL

5PE

CIH

EN

P7

'j/61 .::

j(I":S

UMWA~O

oN3

0/6

-M

e:'W

..~

.WI

TH?:J-o·x~-t:}~

'(:1~

ClA/~~

~~)

':~

.0

:.." -- -

---I' .-t-~ :.

'0

"

: ·'11. ., .

" --~-

.

" -- :--:'4. \J

'. - ::~-~......o..:>-....n-<\j- '- . I

: \j-:..--()

· .

.~~.

~~~~~-~

A-IO

o-~

IIt I

. . . . I . ·I. I. . . . ·

-=----....-.......... --..... :-:........--~--.,..- -----_ .....

~==~. . ."O,~ . . --.

. .\j-f_ -1

u..

.;~

-f'---'l. 0()

, \i...

"'I'.

'. ---i

I

, I.:.It- "'I '.: 1 j

--i. ==-...L

'\I

- ::-tr ;.r- -

... '. -... '. ',' .",

0-5'/I /

.. ' '.. ," ",

,C?-2, I

-<:)

\-()

A-II

IY41

Df"

)1\IA

4U..

I\

/~@l>I~~,

---"C~$:.~"

'I~~It-l4

olM

Il.N

J"

'fQ~""eI.l

P7•c.~,d)).

•

--? -If)

I.jl It

)

"} ~

Me::

7xI'?

·IZ>

<4W~

f'lA

n;..

.~r""T

o"'1

4"""

'-

••

l'/z,><

IL..A

.1~a"leLU

:~2St1

Pf\f

'Wfto

Hf'l()~I"U::P,

•zE

4><

.~6~

Her

AL-

5{I

)D

~ I (\)

~--;---:--.-..

:.~.--~.-:

,,

6CA

Le:

:¥t>

'=II_

OIl

".i""

,..",'.

:C,-'

,"-1f';"

:'.':'

'.:-...-

::,,;,i

.;2

~?ECTI()N

~

-I()

-~

,I·:::>

5/6-1

YPf:.

x~

WA

lL~o

iI

IV

AM

E~

Ae

olle

.

1'1(

;1X

1"·1

II}

!6.?

t%

Il'i

.Oa"

1EL

e.l<

lT1o

tY0

.00

2/(

n

.j5Ecrl~.l2.-

FIC

./2

rnR

TIT

Iot-

iTE

5TP~HEL

3P

EC

IME

HPt

:.'

'5/6'~oM~v

ON

:36ft

:}M~L.

SIlJ

'O'A

llft\

5'xd

WIN

W\l

J~I~c~

WI~~

f'f'

lAM

p)

~~~=no;~

~ -~

-d..-J.

6 IIid \I

~4t

G-t<:I

..

~:J ~

llJ~ ~ ()

- --;-:-;--l---- - ~91.9f.-In 1

: -l()" \,""\.l

'. "11__ OJ

APPENDIX B

RESULTS OF RACKING TESTS

<0-1

.8a'

700

fD.~

6a:?

:J IQ

~~ rL

0 0'¢ I .....J

~ r. hi~I/ .

5()() ).11'

!JI

~. Ift:IO .!J.

\~If

~().() JIf

-()." -0·5 ~.4 -0.3 -CU. -.?I J. t7.1 C/.1. 0.3 O.A\ 0.5 17.6

I L ~ DISFLACE~EN1 l~

j /i".

-ZoO

!I.

-oxrrij -4.::t:?

1/-600

7-(;.00

-700

II

-SOO II

1I I

I !

SFECIMEN Pl o - ~'(Cl..e ~. .1 FIG.

LOAD -DISPLACEMENT CURVES • - ':::::~I...C No. Z. 15.J. - C.T~E:: No. 3

5-1

I

ta'

I.·rD~ I~-

°0 ip::;: I

~...J Itl?

7-./V f""\

L 0 ~ / V~

~/ / /A

~Y ~ ~ ~~)

-OLe -tJOT -Ott ,0175 -Ob -17.03 -a.ot -at'L- o~ MZ / 0.0+ d-"5 o.dl .:%~

/V / j/ DI5 PLA CE~ lENif

./

/ V V I~ ~)

./ / -60

/V / /p

/ ( V .....

~- -lOa

I ~7

-----/~

J/ -I~

-!<:X'I!

II

I1

5PECIMEN P2. Q-~""?L.-~ N...l fiG.• - &"(c:;z.,e N.... 2-

LOAD-DI5PLACEMENT CURVES L..-?,..~e N.... 3> /6

B-2.

IF

1//

,;-

/rf

/

I I I

SPECIMEN PZALO.l1D-DISPLACEMENT CURVE~

B-3

G)-C'(~~ tJo. 1• - ~.,..c:::;u:s No. z.A - C'T".::;L-e N... 5D-~'l<:::US No.4

FIG.17

~.~ tJ!.f)

~

Q eGl:;

(3..::.l 17~

I~ h ,iZ5 /"

V-~

I~~ j Ila' f-..,

/ 7'(, l V:VL1 ~

I(fI V / v tZ5 I

'/ v~.06 O.tJ7 "tJ.~ -()'()5 ~()3j, -O·oz -(}.OJ 0./11/ 11.t11 O.te> t!OO+ dtJ5 0./% O./7T o-t't;

/ II tr.J ~ II DI 5PU CEt1ENrI .

! . J~ /. (I~)

-50

(;IJ U75 (I

j (jI~

VJ!/r I V·

I .~

~~jI H?I

.~/JV~ -liS

I~. ? / / / -ZoO I./ I

/ V 1/-ZZ6......-- ./

J:.. ---2"50

I

5PECIMEN P3 0-~ N... .L FIG.• - C(,;::;t.£ N... 1-

LOAD-DI5FLACEMENT CURVE5 .A - ~\a.z No. ~ Ie>[1 - c.:1'''L.e; Net. +

5-4

/1a? /

7{n / J

~ v I0 ~ /a / '/ I-.:I

~

ta::J I V I /(/

, ilA

)"../J(] 1/

,~b7 I J /1£ il 1/ v

~tZ jalO j-o.ot O-OZ J. (J.~/-a~ -QiJtt atJO ".00\ Ot£) tJ.1P c?1f.

/Ii<='

~/ ~A G' /V f ~V DI5F>LlICEMEN!Fr~s)

I /1 ~VI j

I 'T

f v,

-Ztt::>

I )v V

/

! j,V(. -~~v I/ o - ?-u::i-E ~. i

-""'0 ~- t.~ N.. z.V • - t-rc.u:: N.:.. ~

/i IV

~RfmON SPECIMEN P3A fiC./

W LOl1D-DI5ftACEMENr CURVES I':)

B-.5

II",",~

'" I, ,I,," I

I~ 0('''~ t

~,

I, ,~ 16" I

-.I /,I,

IQ, I

~ / , I

~ fN I

,tJ,," II ,

""-oi 100 I .... ,II, , ,, i //1 f1 ./I I ,

l I ,ta!) I I I

'( I' I / ~I ,,/1

~I,I I I I

11I I I I~I~ Ii .l ~ 1/

/1 i I II" H /1/ ,/ I , ,',r I

~I " ..J;~'1 ! ./ ): -", /, _1

IIF .- '/" ! / 7/ ........ l T.... / "", II , ,

" ,r', , ,

~ Jl:/ " I 'I, .1fr~ tz: 1/,1'" , , >r ' ./'-iT /,

~(L;::-tf"" /;'"

~:'..:,

'I /.... ...'I

,",'" ~~..:'"~.c " /' .!

...-1"~ v:i ~' r ,

"; /".--~~ ..",. ,'" ",

,... ; ~"/I",' ,

// ,. , ¥' , ,~ I ....

I '" ~ , ..../, I I I / .~I' ~ .... , '"/ ... , ... I I I ,

....t.~" W.e ~, 1'/ I I / , ~ ,,) ...

k:lA Ia~ -lar /1 Po ,I I 1t'..l..1' I ,,'" ~.t.... ' 1,,-3 ~A,-r 1/ it' '",

~ ",'..-

K® @/ ! II ....~-:/

...... '

Itl '" / '" "/7 i I ' ~,.-'4::: ---;; -/,rJ' ,~ / ...-~~" 7" j..A1'

(~ DI=lPI~ ENl l-INOH5S1//' ~..",."",; .r::I~/1" -...rtr.. .../ /

II II .~ ... .- .... -UJO -~~I !~ /J ,f! ",/~,'f!I I

IL.... • / I [ .. ~tj.II/, Iji I -300

'dJ ItT 1~"";r / ,/ II , P

I I /II

/",/1 I!l I/ I~ i' -"""'"

I ~ I I '1~y I 1 ,/1I I ,/ I, II

II, .x I, / I I ,': i / I -5COif I~ II !i 14~A I 0 ?-(?l..e N". ~f~ I ! I

I I I 'I " . I I • ?,..a~ Nc. -4I,I !!.. -~

/I / ! If! I A ?~ 1'-1". !5, 13 ?'1'ae;:. N". 6./ I I J.!I I I , -700 '* ~"1'a.G No. 7

II I

JYI, If, Cfe.u::. No. B

~I1 ,-1 0 ?'(c::A...e Nc. ")! '/f , -&Jo I

1// . I 'f

I~ ;/ I'/ ~

9 .... ; I»/ I I iI -l~

'",

j -1I00

PARTITION 5FECIMEN P3A~R _ %11 C'(.?~

FIG.~D-DI:f'LACEMENT CURVES 20

5-6

l~

km

~ ~

.....0 ea:

~ w A

~)~

~ ,/

.. /" V 'I;j!fa: ~

~~ / /;1/

~ /

~WJ / ~~

2/)() .a<fI/ft/1 j/~W P r-j j

/ te ~~ li LQ.ll:o ~.14 a!2. 0.0 "'~ -'Q.~ -0.0.4 /. a04 q~ 0.10 a.1f 0.14 tJ.~

r.V " -~ "~~V L-@ ~I

/ /

~f DISfPtAc EMENT(i~I L

"If 1-~~./~J rL fY

,.,

/ ....ro:

I / V#/

--sa::

"~ III"" ~/.

~

I V'" -rv

~X'

y-w

-..,00

-1GtV

ffiRNION 9FECIMEN P4~

FlC.O~ Na.i(VIOo~)

e-Cfa.t N".z.(v'~ " )LOClD-DI5PtACEMENT CURVES A-.cra.~No. ~C\8" II ) elYlbd- 1;8"Ct'~ t:1-~a...;; Ne..--Kv~i1 II)

B-7

lla:7,.-+.,. I

,P

,~/l,,. tat' ~ .,

~, , ;r, I, I

~,

I: / .i,I

-J "I

,ii r is10 I -'I I 'II ,,

r-P ~ JI ';'; j !bd II ' "JI / AII ./ i,:...J~

I '" ./ I

! , , " / 4-I ",

I , ¢~I I I

~, , ./ I,

t I 1 ,, I PI, I

"I~ 1

,5a:? / .1. './ !J/

. I

,I i,.:. ,'T,

'" r:I 1)~I

",,' ,i I+. r:( I,,

/ I 1 ,T,I / , ,

:./.'/" )I, ~I~/ 91 I

~,

,~ti ,x' "J-' , ,.I' ¢ ii' , I' ,... "4~ ,. j."", " --- I I-'

V"'---- 1~- /; //',. -4 I ,'/

~,j', I-- Ic:;t7 j) II

~~jv: .I' 1

I "",j(" ~O.I"t!J,~

~' /1/1

o?Aa 0,$ fa30 ~ ~t€.,..." d.1O .' fa06 otJO 0.05 P.I~ .l?ib o.~ 0.30· o.~ "."'!O,.... V'c~tv.

~~~~,./-'C'iI

~~I' 1':< \...,i'J il'lJiA::I;o isla! "'~IZI"" -\a7 A.-

/,!

I~:; """': ....

,.-DISf~(:EMCNT -INr Ir=~1

1 I, ",.,1 'II

; ,,1--/"/

~,:"""

~ ,-I -,

oI~"" /' ~

~ iftr "j( 1,

"'7

" ~iN¥'I

I~ / ~,1 1

:, , -5t'OI # l /

l I' ," "

, -"'t?

~, ,,

I, I,

I 'A,

-J::lOI

'I f,

I,I

t n,,1 eoo Ir rr; ,

0-C(a.e No.5 (]d~ 91SP.),,1/1

,I f..' ",,' -~ ._<~ ~~0'I'11)+ '7 , A-cr~ ~:7 (¥~~ . .J

II G-'::"(~ No.6 caok" ),"

p-~

I ,- I

I II , I

I, ",'

1 A., -1I.:;t?

T,

I

PARTITION SPECIMEN P4 FIG,, it-~J...I'

LOAD-DI5Fl.ACEMENT CURVe=> 22.-l~

tj4U_ ?>kJ' ~~

5-8

11«;1,

I ~ IIII "X'OI

!

I i 800I I

II

I 1a:/ I

! !

I rQ i ftJCO I:J

i ~ IQ ?<XJ ./_~

a I /,:~ ,;;.</ /IPt' I,..:J i 4c:?O I

t;J11/....~Jf I

j()() o/~

1I~

~l~L.!i! UJO ...1

~~ ./J

1~r"

M. " tZ 1/

,)!r' --- f('l' /<10.,

~'~ 19d <r'1-0·/4 f-t>./Z C·IO -o.o~,.....,-o.." 0·04 -().O'Z. ~. a 04;/) o.otJ oJo tJ./+•

~7 ~/-~'

c·oz

~ ~ DISPLACEMENTu~~\.., nI. -/00 ,../'

~7' 9 II' ~j;trr !.L ~,~

f I a'·~~~ I I~I-,' , A/:

I ;- ~}' I /J... (VI~),.0 ~~O-C'(.:;I£. 1

V -"'roo .-~ 1-10. Z. eVIb"):L. - ...p ,r ;Jr. A---c-(.:;u::. No. ~ (y&') -

t~,

j~ I O--c0l,e. 14... -4 O/el)s::t --;,00'

i /" r1 .d N""'/ -(,0(.,

;el£;~-7ol'J

I II ;

;

f3qRTlllON 6FEC1l'1EN P5 FlC.LOQD- DI5PLlK::EMENT CURVES 2.3

Ylbl- Va' t:"'t:~

/~11Pt7 /

laX' 1i'1 ti, .....

" Iff

I

cri ~ II ~i~ .. .bLJ

~ , ' ,T; 1 ,, I

' 'I(,, I ~

;; I1"\ 8t:V 1 t. L r

I

9 J rr I ~1, ,

t(J 1 I I700 , , 1.1 I I

I I ¢ ,~ , 1 i1 , "f, ,, i, j~ I / f I6C() / I

, , (<fJ r I f' ~, ,V ' 1 p,/

~ f itA, -;.Ju' I

!~ I / V7 f 1I

I I . / ~',

.Ja::)J. /J ~,-I '

,..

~/ ' I ' I r

~~' .../~ I "f/ l!1/ , II-

i,

J:j/ / '~1 ~

~1. I / .:,/,1,'

,"... ' 1

j;;7-:;.,..;9 Tl Jl ~,,'" /. ..:,," /, I' ,

.. ~L. l~ ,I J",'

", ';-:. ~r.' ,r f, ~ ~~. ~,~/~ 1-o.tJ -(J.7 ~.~ '~5 -004 ~;, ,.. /1 at/. o.~ ,t'Oot l. (J.z. , 03 a-4 "-~ 0.'- aT ".6

/ r r I' ,,/ /~~,- I

~ ~~ DISRlACl MEl'. TrNCHE5~ if ,./ ,.I , -~ .L , ... '

'f f ~ 1':'~0:' I"'''t'... -eM

T 1 // /"rI ' 1/'

I,I ~/.'..,

I~oI ,

r ~ ~ .' ~I I i, . Ii,I j -4Gt' I

I : f1 ifI ~ L,

-500, f ,. f,$I II

,-~

I I rr ~

I,

IP. J,

I a ,I, -700

ii II ~~ fJI ,

I I '-' ~

1

I ,r .~ ~ Q- t-~ Nc.5 (}4ufE;ol.l::. Or.sf!II t1. J~ " ~ • -~"""" No. 6 C)I.,'ll

I I rr/ t!J

a- C;~8 N<o. 7 (~~III

[;l- era..e. No. B (~Il II I~'I I .... 1000 x - C'(~ No. ~ (V'fa +-

i I ~ ~I

<8' - CY&:l-S N... '0 (.r/e PeW< Ol~I Ii -11t\O I A' I I I

I ' , k I PAR lIT ION SPECIMENI -1'&701,

I PS FIG.L I

I-I~l/ LOAD-DI5FLACEMENT CURVES 2.4,,

I 1/.4« - ?:t8U <::;(a.es'"

5-10

~

w

~ w / ~~V'

"1 r7l~a 'IX /.9 ~ ./V J!

~V V.w )

~ ~PI v~'..4V It4!:2

I,r

I/f I if

./ IX !/ J IIA~ V ~D ~~

"'.If'> til.. 0.1-+ <'-/2: ro. lO fa~ ~ ~~ V !7 oj! i?b+ 0-"" 006 t'. k:' 0.1t ldlo4 0.'"J h -\a::I

V I -~V ~ DI t3PL~CEME~ IT-INCr-E5

I ~. fj III ! /JV-JV~

f/~[.i'L -M

r .r t1V-6tO

I r j W -wI II 'I'

,j}. -ea:J.; i£

I ~

/ VI / -I.@

I / -H~

1

<::1

I.....(Ul::l

1 -t~

~RTITION SPECIMEN P6 o-ceu::; N".I~~>?Il fiG..~L-P N.>.Z(YfJl'

~D-D15FLACENT CURVE5 vldl-Y811C0l-£5~ t-lo.~CY6U Z5G-C(ae. NoAC'$1 ~

f)-II

Z'J!Xl

!t:J(1:J -- -..~

..~ItlOO itlt'

~ 11c ~ al

9 ,/"\oW /...1

AI'I~ If

i I 1

/~dr'I I

IW f.../

I " J' I',I II I

~ I ,~ -.... "

, /r ~r, ~ ~1

1 Ie,oo ./ II.,j I

,r", l~

'Ir '1" ) !~ I ~l/6oa? 1 I ..it' I

I / f!J/r/ r TI

~ "f':" '"~I / L.. I:'/~ I

.,t;,~:~

1Ifr.'<T 'I

/!fl~~ ~ I~

~c~l ...~ v 9C. -~/I J........I__~

£1 tJ.

~<~~d..

I~ l! I

~ II ~ *-0.") Ob aT ~ --0.6 -t'-'4 Ia~ ,,/ ",/"',JI '../ tJ.t) I, t~z. Q.?£' o.-'t t).6 0.6 'd.T tJ.b" / ;/ ; /

~r~~ K® ~ @'" ~ tJ:Ja./' .-bA"'.+- .Av"/ ~ ...

7 j' f J}/- -(~ PI Ll, EN"F INa~5I" ..

~ DIS N=Mhf --~ 4a::> -

I r f..I' 7' 1~ ..I' '". '" / lI J I '" "':~

" " ,'.t ~

/ , /t· /7r r~

, I

J. ~L-i /f I &:;()I

~I

/ ~jr ,

I ,

jI I I, •4 tat?I ;:r I ,f ~; "I ~~'

,i'1 1 \t!'a::'

I~ if A

I':J

II ,I Ii / AI l~ I

': I~ ",- -!I I '"

II ! k'I ,I I l~i... I

iI I iI I

II reooI~I

I!II

2t:J()O

Z2PO

~RTlTION 5PECIMEN P6~11 ~l ! l~l U~TT] FIG.LC)qD-DI5PLACEMENT CURVE> - ~~~ c- 8 ~5~ 2G'lk- ~ 'leu ~

~- I ~

e,-I2.

eoa01to

Ien IQ ~

9 II I

1 ! Ij

I

J~~

Ir

// I

I // / I

,-

I ! " / ,II . /'10-/ /

I ltJt) A/'- ./

I V;t/ / I/

J'

I I~~,I"

,-

fa:? 1/

) r V l. I

I ~r l,J ~L/ I/

Ia.le> a~ 0.14- ~.~ OlO Ot78 aa. 004- J~ oJl k7.OP 0..06 ~.IO 0.12"'''''"

~,~P.PO/ V II r.7

f~ 1@ ®)!!/ "'/,.~/I ~,.:

r:t~~DISPLACEMENT-INCHES,.:;t 7

I j,

, , jr/~

,/,'-,.//

,,- ,'-

I !/ 1 l/ .-,~

,,- I W

/ '$:)/

I ./ , /.;' ~I,I r p'} ,

I

I

I •./ ,- I ~

r / ,-I I ,- ,-

IIt I fi' ,-II, ,- ,'" i I,

~/ "I ,I~I !I I ,- ,

1//. " IJSf , ,

~

i

PARTITION 5FECIMEN F7 .?T~ Y~l_ v~\ o--cr~ t-Jo~~ ~,' AG.• - ~~ Na~ Vl~u

LaaD-D/5FLACEMENT CURVES ~-~ tJ ...1.G ~j 2713 - ~-(~ ~@ I '8A

5-1~

/1«:1

II I

II

Ii

I I

;f ijV

I

~I

I I ~ ~VI

i' -iJ~

PARTITlQ\J ~ECIMEN P7LOAD-DISPlACEMENT CURVES

0-14

FIC.28

II

rt"" I

iC I-~ ~ I

9 !I

Ir!

II

!>tJO

I I

Z/JO ./.---;7I /

"., :/I /'" /

Y 1/,/

IDO

/v

I ,

~V

-<J26 ~.24 ~.20 -o.~ ~.Ie. -P'O!) -a 04- t7.o-t P.tJ~ i <P. It. o.~ d.lL' tl.Z4 ~2tJ tJ.?£ o.~ 0.40

~ @I IDISPLL CEi .Ae.. If-It~Cl- E5-1a7

IU

-&xl I II

I,

I!

~

I II I

! i I I.....4a?

II I

\

Ii

iI

III

I

I.'

~FmliO'1 5FECIMEH F8 FIC.LOOD -Df5FL?lCEMEHT CURVE 2.0

5-15

/ 1;.u]/

/ I

"pI ~; .,/ I ,

II I

01 I ). I I

cO ~ I I II ~

.--JI /~ If' I

Q I ~I, I I I

/ : I II

9 1 /F

~i I'00 1i i

WI .& I I

I/ I

/ I,

~rJ //

I I~W / I

~.1/11'I .

IIIII

4J~ if i; I

Itt' ti',I

""rl I I,

" , 'I

1/ K'Ih/

;f~l 1/ lot /.'

"I .~

/ ,,'I-0.16 O.~ O.~ o.e tllO -d.()f; -Q.()(b ~a0-4- tJ.1K) 4114 ~t"i> /J.~ ala tJ.1Z 17.14- t?~

,

/I ;;~1./(~ ~

/I

I

" 1// V/~ 7 D15PLI~CffME HT-INCr~E54 1/ -I~ 1,

I~f / /; //I //

- ./ '/''I,

/1 V;l,// / /"7

.!

I 4 If .J:r I~/I j// .~/ /I I

I I -mI " ; jf I

fI /t fI

J f P '; ~1/ I

~j -!a::/

/1 , ,/I~ I

f ;1 l/'I

I :/ (;) ~O'(a:e 8 Vf4>"1/ -~~,

'/.4• el"c:l c:::-ra,s @ V1~~

I A 1sI-~ eV6M

I,GI end ~<B1!6·

! I I ,I..{;a,~ J ~

I, I,

, I I,,)

I It',I ~ III I

~R1iliO'i 5FECIMEN FB4 FIC.I I :r ,t , -t'a:lf ;' LQ::tD-DI5FlACEMENT CURVE5 30~(

f:>-16

I~ / AI rt"'\ ~ /ll /L

-~

II

~ I,j / flI I 8tIO ~

c //~~ 7~

!/

I~I I t~ 1#00 J

I I

II j / tI I I

5c:1O IiI

I I / / V J! ~ ~

~ k I Vir! J'/ II

Av Il4:> Iiiw~ ! I

1tOO

/~~7

aJ k 1.f.7"a!l r-().7 -().(, laG "".4 l-o.!l .Z t'A ar:. itI·6 tu) 0."

/" IVj ~f( 'J~@

~~ !/

f 1 / I. ~ ~V DI~pI"__ I .._.

ofT-I ~c~ E5~[ ..r D~

~ I ~ 1 j II'i;J

'A

I I 4~ 'I fP ,

I ~I

i q vI 1/ :~I / II ~/~I,

I~i -700

I1 -w

(

I !~ . ~ Io -1Jt:,1 CTcL.~~

IV / I ·-./,." 1 I,i-V4'I -la::l:l D-~8J1 I

11 'I ",-1/2 I

/ -llaocb-~IOr-l I

I... ,

f I -~I VI' -1!)(XI ffiRlilict-1 5FECIMEH PB~ FIG.I

I! I LO~D-DI5Fl.JqCEMEf'-1T CUAVE5. 31I -1.bO

13-17

,~ I

iI

.x;\JJ

S .oW

~,

i I

Ij I i I~ I i

;

I IA

, ~"'""//J.rt::t:J II/I"

l/} ,,0

8" II' .

~;/ "~

,'/' ",Ia7 .,~'

& V " ,~"

.-.-Is"

~~_.-

ro·lt'J ~.It -tJ.IO -1)46 .---A ' .-a0.:'.I~ - 4.l3 -oa.; -OM ~"'~du.,," ~iJZ d.04 ".~ 0.10 0.1£ 0·14 O./(;;.

~r1 ® (~ I ~F~--

.-- ... ~

...' ~)~V D5PlJACc_.

-IT-I'--o1F~,I IU"/-/~"/ -!<It:'

~~/ " 11/9V"~/

...,I /.

/1V'I

f,

/' -~

/ p,

I,I~ "/ / IP I

J I I

~

" f¥ I I

~ , I

k' I~ I

-~

IfiqR1i1i~ eFECl~ ~

O-bT~i/f~1I FIG.•• -lHl;) ~ e v~

tn:tD-Df5FlACE.t1ENT CURVE~..a -1ST " GI~/1 3Z[;1- ZlJD II ~V611

5-15

· 1h()t)

~ '//-~

./I?A::/ Y

g V/'

/; if~

,. / ,~/'

M'XJ / ,IJ/, ,

;1/ ';/~ /}1~~"~ j

Ifi~l'"

h wp,

~/'"'

".~ 1-().t:JO O.TO TJ.ftIO -(J.~ -0-.010 ~ ~$'~ 4Zt:J a60 tJ..o\O' d.'50 t7.~ no O~..-

A~~ (~ ® ~~/f ffj I DI=:f'lL.J - 1EN~-/N CHED/ ,0 .rr-

~

VJ1(/ If II I

1/11,,/1IP' jt ~

/1 !f,,]/

1/ y/ /,-~

~I, /

V GI-V4D

'::;"(a$ I-sr.l~ .-~' 1z...d.

A_~~U lsr.G-¥'6'1 ZrJ.• -Ift! I1.t.G-Ve,l GnJ.

-I~8)-~1Ot..1

PARlili<J1'-.l ~CJHfr1 ~ FIG.LOAD-DISPLACEMENT CURVES 33

B-l~

iIi

I1I!

rli

19I

iO!~

1

II

i i ~?~ I

./v

IVff! II If I I I I

.//j i JI ~ I I

~/ if !II! I I I I IIIi

II

iIii

I..' I· /1'/ I

~ /1/ I I

i

!

IIIII !I ! ~f:/

9 ....·1~ .iI I: ../~ ri ! I' -/ /

I

i~!

II

-Wi

I!I

iI, i.l 1/ /

1 i I) V //,

I

I

I

I 11'''".. / I; ~ I

- : !I

I i

I

I.

Im'

ii

I~i I

II

I

II

:I

i

I

II I'

,:reo

ffiRTl110H 5FECtMEH PiOl..a1D-DI5A..ACEM~ CURVE5

o-zo

FIG.34

/.i

II

I

I

I

/ 'I1("! V. iJ. j. I

/ "IJ~ I I I

I I ! I ~J ~'J

I : I ! I ,.,

: : i ! !Jot/Ii';! I! I I .// I l<:bo

I 1// I II~

~RTJTlo-i 5f'ECIM~ FlOLa::lD-DI5FLACEMEl'-ff CUR\!ES

e,-ZI

I

I

I

FIG.35

I

/ ,:j/ .;~.//

. ./ .,? /

/rf/ V' ,:

)ff ~/

/:11 I .l

1I I J~'.I Ii/~

/ / /j /

1/ .I iT /

-~

F1=1R111io~ 5FECIHEN PlilJ:¥O-DI5FLJt;EMT CUAVE5

FIC.36

w

Ii

,

eli I(,(J()

I I !3 II I I I

I I II I

I 1A:'

II !Q ~0

10;1

I~ 1/7 II4t;t:I II? ,I i I

II )~

V IT / III

.. i i

3a:? IIrf{l1 --,I

II

i 1

l!£~IF III

IW

I ~~ol :~ !I~ ~. j [7/0

17I

~

I '4/1/ I~/yo

Mf7h I

-a"", ()b) a70 ~f#C -().fJt:' oOA<' -iorl'o!O ~to J It:! 001"20 ()o~ O..t,O l1.'JIO ailO 0.10 (Jf;O

,ljlF j) ..~~~g, k®II

r~ Dl~DFUqCElt1fr~-lt+ICH C5! ..J;i f [I 11i'i ./ ~

.

I T (V; ~:Ii

l /I / ~

i

! / ij7 I

j jl J ~o IIi . Irl

III

II I

'! ~I I Ii i

!/ .' 1/I IJI i

i -1Jt7O I i

i~ ./

:<:5I

I

!

/0' V T~

Ii I./ Mo

~RJi1TON 5f'ECIMEN PitGl ~M ~ I~

FIG.• 1/4. 1 ~

L~D-DI5PLACEHT CUAVE5 AI. 3/0" 37i;I Vel

t{)

~~ '\ \ \\U -"0z- -

"'"~ \

~I, ~'\ 1\ §,...-

"- I~ i'\ \'" b ......

~ ~ 1\\... ~ 1-

~.~\\ \ \ \ \

~

~~~ ~~~ \\

,-

~ ~

~f\V\1\\ \ \\ ... -

~

~ -

~~\[\\ '~

~[\\ \ \\'\

~ \\ \ \ \\~~ \' ~

~~~

~~,

~

~~I ~

~I~.~:>til - ();1Q~b' .-OJ;;lH;I

I I I I

~ ~~ ~ ~

1-

I~

/~

v1-

~r\ /i) v

/-11--.. I V

@ /~

,v~

I~/'

~C7'

/ V'I __ ;::- V ~~~ ./ II ~

~ -~ ,~/Ii:t'

~ l)Vv

~~~

----~ V'./ ./I

~V

~V / '/ ~~V L-/ J~.... ./ ~ ~

/ :P;t;/VY'" V IpV L.---

/4. I-~~V V ~?/ / .--- ./

./ //V ,/~/ V

V / P7.....<;)

1.>"/ - -'-00 /'

h ;/ y v~/' ---l.---

/ ~-.5Q;1 ;y~V ~~~.

./~

V~V V

~

~v ~I---

~L--o" -!>-~

ZOO

I~ra VIdO 1.0

"fZ

0Ve.

t:lVEMGE PE?1K L.Q::tD Y6. PEfqK DI9PLtICEHENT OF fiG.CYCLE: ~R1i1i~ :;FECIME~ PZ-Pll 3~.

B-Z5

APPENDIX C

PHOTOGRAPHS

C-I

Fig. 41:

Fig. 40: Partition Racking Test Set-up--Rear View

Partition Racking Test Set-up: Channel Guides andLoading System

C-l

Fig. 42: RacKing Test Set-up: Detailsof Pinned Frame &Load Applicationand Measurement

Fig. 43: Racking Test Set-up: Displacement MeasurementInstruments

C-2

Fig. 44: Partition Test Specimen P2

,..

Fig. 45: Partition Test Specimen P2: Slippage @Top Runner

C-3

Fig. 46: Partition Test Specimen P2: Failure @ LoadingEnd Stud @Bottom Runner

Fig. 47: Partition Test Specimen P2: Typical Slippage @TopRunner

C-4

,..

-

-

Fig. 48: Partition Test Specimen P2A: Typical Failure atEnd Stud

Fig. 49: Partition Test Specimen P2A: Typical Stud Failure

C-5

Fig. 50: Partition Test Specimen P2A: Typical InteriorStud Failure

Fig. 51: Partition Test Specimen P2A: Gypboard Failure @Interior Face

C-6

Fig. 52: Partition Test Specimen P2A: Typical ScrewDeformation @ End of Test

•

Fig. 53: Partition Test Specimens P3 and P3A

C-7

Fig. 54: Typical Uplift Restraint StrapPartition Test Specimen P3A

C-8


Fig. 56: Partition Test Specimen P3: Typical Failure @TopRunner

C-9

I

Fig. 57: Partition Test Specimen P3A: Typical Slippage @Vertical Joint and Wrinkling of Gypboard @ Failure


C-10

Fig. 59: Partition Specimen P4: TypicalSlippage Failure @HorizontalJoint

Fig. 60: Partition Specimen P4: Gypboard Failure @End Stud

C-ll

,.

.


Fig. 62: Partition Test Specimen P5: Typical SlippageFailure @ Vertical Joint

C-12

Fig. 63: Partition Test Specimen P5: Typical Slippage@Vertical Joint

•

Fig. 64: Partition Test Specimen P5: Typical Damage @ScrewLocation @ Vertical Joint

C-13

Fig. 65: Partition Test Specimen P5:Uplift Restraint Strap


C-14

Fig. 67: Partition Test Specimen P6:Separation of Gypboard $ EndStud @ Failure

C-15

Fig. 68: Partition Test Specimens P5 &P6:Typical Bolt Hole Deformations @Uplift Restraint Strap

C-16



C-17

-


C-18

..

-

Fig. 72: Partition Test Specimen P7:Typical Failure Above Door Opening

C-19

Fig. 73: Partition Test Specimen P7:Uplift Restraint Strap

Fig. 74: Partition Test Specimen P7: Typical SeparationBetween Gypboard &End Stud @ Base

C-20

Fig. 75: Partition Test Specimen P7:Detail at Uplift Restraint Strap

C-2l

-

Fig. 76: Partition Test Specimen P7: Typical FailureAbove Door Opening (Rear View)

\

11Fig. 77: Partition Test Specimen P7: Typical Failure

Above Door Opening (Front View)

C-22

,..

Fig. 78: Partition Test Specimens P8 &P8A

-Fig. 79: Partition Test Specimens P8

&P8AC-23

.



C-24

\

Fig. 82: Partition Test Specimen P9: Failure AboveWindow Opening

Fig. 83: Partition Test Specimen P9:Cracking in Gypboard @ Failure

C-25

-

Fig. 84: Partition Test Specimen Pll

Fig. 85: Partition Test Specimen Pll: Failure AboveMetal Door Frame Opening

C-26

..Fig. 86: Partition Test Specimen Pll:

Detail @Metal Door Frame

Fig. 87: Partition Test Specimen Pll: Failure AboveDoor Opening

C-27

Fig. 88: Partition Test Specimen Pll:Failure Above Door Opening

Figure 89: Partition Test Specimen Pll: FailureAbove Door Opening

C-28

Fig. 90: Partition Test Specimen P11: Failure AboveDoor Opening

Fig. 91: Partition Test Specimen P11:Failure Above Door Opening

C-29

RACKING TESTS OF NON-STRUCTURAL BUILDING PARTITIONS

Documents

Transcript of RACKING TESTS OF NON-STRUCTURAL BUILDING PARTITIONS