7360S On the stiffnesses and strengths of infilled frames RJ. MAINSTONE, oso, ance Notation “4. ixgona ant of frame (on centeines) %——Sisgaal lana a nt {kr isgoal shortening of frame (on sentcines) lagna! shortening of in 2h, ‘fevsal rigs of colamas and beams of Fame respectively Young's modus of fl {roting senate atrial ial (cube stength for const and short pier tenet fo bic woe) taht of ram fo centeins of beams) teh of onzomal racking strength of infle fame ovcontal ct strength of frame mthost ot ‘nominal honvonat racking srengta ofa ata il = Ay oezonti racking rene of 6a uname al Romina eiseoal siines of il as anil Tenet of rame fom ceielines af coum) tea fa ‘Bconal Fad nile fame mine slagoeal Toad on fill a an ifll = RA” (anes ¢ and ‘not loc mt atmate and See crack respective) rominel iaporal Tord fame = gona fad cated by frame with tn st the same deleton thickness ‘arate th of iil as inated i Fig. 1 ‘Hlstive wish of InP considered as sine siazonal ‘cand Faetote sales appropiate to ses in tusterack rena espectvely as dened in cqustons (60 (0) 2 aope of diagonal ef oi horonat Dd af ete tions parameters a dened in equations (7) and (8) Introduction Recont developments in the design of malistore frames have emphasized the ‘mmportanoe of limiting sidesway under the ation of horizontal leads or other Iateal disturbance." Reliance ony on rig joints makestt irtaaly impossibleMAINSTONE Fig. 1. Netaton to achieve economy in the design of the columns in tall bullings and leaves tReestaltersatives.” Continuous shear walls may be introduced in some bays {bree alSrapory ith the framed structure of the remainder: diagonal fo,2st sey be used: or masonry oF conetete inflls may serve in 3 somewhat analogous manner. ogee fal Bekaviour of an infil i resisting wracking toad i more complex than thar ofa simple pinned diagonal strut. If, before loading, the sl fs Tr rate perfectly, is initial behaviour wil lie somewhere ewweon the ered fa igs 2a) and 20). Ke maximum possible contribution Se Ne oad wil be achieved bya state of Uniform shear throvshout, to resisting ih pti transfer of shear along the interfaces wi the Fame See eros ensign on fo faces and continuous compression oa the other a corneas amen, Considered asa sagone str, te fll may chen Fee ro mdan ffesuve width w (Fig. 1). At the other exttome, the inter Be Si to he concentrated clowe to the comers and the distribution ac feat ae hls nonuniform, leading to a behaviour equivalent to that oo aah uty Between the two extremes the interface reactions ol g much mae Guribued over Anite lengths ofthe beams and columns andyON THE STIFFNESSES AND STRENGTHS OF INFILLED FRAMES T T t Fig.2. The betavou of an nila tame unlike the concentrated regctons of 2 true diagonal strut, will induce some change in the mode of deformation of the frame itself leading to 8 further Increase inthe composite stifaess. Diagonal cracking, it procedes crushing ‘ofthe infil, will moiy this nial behaviour by creating nest, two or more Struts in place ofthe original one (Figs 216) and 2). Quite marked changes inthe mode of deformation of the frame may then result from rdistbutions fof the foterface reactions. If, before loading, the fnfll does not ft perfectly, the interface reactions and the esting bebaviour wil bs frther modified ‘A-continaoos gap tthe top, for instance, wll may that load can be tans ‘mite tothe iil only by compression and shea on the vetial faces. The Sligniment of the effective strut will then be somes’ diferent initially (Fiz. 2) snd there willbe a tendency fr the infil to slip and cotate unl i ‘bears on all ame members atthe foaded corners. att fxn the inital fof the inl, the stifneses of the Beams and eolurmn wll cleaysnflgense the bebaviour andi follows thatthe presence of other ins adjacent to the one considered wil azo alfect i 9MAINSTONE Fig. 3, Full scala specimen with ame 9 far ost 4, Ad hoc ests on full-scale single nilled frames undertaken atthe Building Reeaidh Seation in the 1950s gave an early Might into this behaviou™ and Research St only inaeterminste neve i terns solely ofthe norm! para comes Jiu On the bass of thess few tests & purely empirical Ime meter Gna was later tentatively suagested by Wood for use in the design action Lor Paddings>. By aiving the composts stenstb of an ined Foe ea enoeal te separate strengths of te frame and nl shorts rn Gf confoning detil and recognized the desirability of & Prete tead Tacor where strengis were most Jeperent on the inl any simple aternntive to this veraction formula for desig PUR. pons senmned tobe the concept of the equivalent diagonal strut fist suzasted BePoibakon Trou not be expacted to represent adequately the ull range Eee hau of the infil, but the possiblity temincd| that 3 ight ore es icad toacexptable preictions of composite strenats fhe ettoxs eae always compensated for one another as well ay the cary tes Suggested they might” oe ey gation seemed to be required. Since the main interest ta net A aenath and stability of eal framed uildings, was seni aaa evel ange of behaviour of indivtdual panels, even beyond the 1 ee ini as reached at a raatlvely small sidesway. This tr pupied with an attempt to explore the fll ange of restrain clfered emest recatsurrours, distinguished she investigation from othersON THE STIFENESSES AND STRENGTHS OF INFILLED FRAMES Intiated at about the same te, notably by Smith." also necessitated {predominantly experimental approach.” A rigorous analytical approach was not, in principe, impossible. ite difcatics mulipid so. rapidly, when owelinear stress straia relationships, variations. in inal it ot the inl pon-homogencity, progressive cracking ete. were inisoduced, that gro¥s Smipications were, in practice, amavoidable and direct testing preferable 8. The tes 10 be described and discussed were nearly all made on 1/6th scale models, but the earher fullsrale fests and one further one served a= onto Tests 7._Thocarier full-scale tests had al been made on ight and heavy concrete cncased steel frames with eveted joints (ferred to as normal frames 1 and 2) find with infling of brickwork or blockwork. The specimens were loaded Within asf euter frame (Fig. 3) ia such a way as to give, i effect, a diagonal Ccomnression (Fig. 2). From the point of ws ofthe frame, this produced ‘compression in the: windsaed" column in place of Ue tension tt would rie In practie (Figs 23) Me). teas simpler to apply the loadin thie way an ‘nce the axl strains inthe columns were relatively smal, the behaviout of the nis was not signiicancly affected, For a full simulation of th sual ToadsMAINSTONE Fig. 5. Mode pocimen with Fame B afer tet {nthe columas ofa single pace! ofa enultstorey frame i would ny es, be recess {a cupeimipoce fsthee compressions and tensions Sue tothe etial Toads and'ning (or similar) ations rom the Raoes above and te vesukant Toads would alos invariably be compress ‘The only diferences were that the stil outer frame was replaced by a sift tack ple to uhh a Pred upper reaction block could be bolted aay where on B'fos'mm snd fo secommodate specimens of diferent sizes and that the inydraulis jack applying the Youd way now atthe Toot ese 48). Foe speck fens consis of more than one panel, addtional fixed eeacton Mocks could so be Pole as coqued tothe Back plate (Fig. 9) The desirable freedoms ‘Sfmovement atthe supports were prosided hy rolles and oorner Blocks with Snifecded snicuations. Applied loads were measured by toroid Toad cells and sidesnaye By sia! sau, 9. Four types of specimen were tested, with the intention of exploring diferent limits to the topes of boundary Testraint that woul! actos a9 iil (a) unframed walls (o which fonds were applied through blocks bedded ‘planet and hasing Bearing of 0 ma along each css. () wall sineounded by stiff Lsection members linked atthe corners by itnitecdgod atculations Fi.) (referred toa tiene lirkase A) J) init Fass with the frames fabricated Irom hat and heat square ection ml sect bars wit full penetration welds at the corners Geipe 2) etersed 10 as normal Frames B and CON THE STIEFNESSES AND STRENGTHS OF INSILLED FRAMES Fig. Model spacian wih fame @ ater cst (Gini frames with the frames out and machined Irom mtd stse plate To combine the siege restraints of the tifenod iokases A with the covmes details ofthe fighter normal frames B (Fis. 8 (cfrted 9 as sillened frame D). 10, The choice of «squats seston tel bar forthe aosmal frames Band was largely ene of convenience; it simplied fabrication arr! save consistent nd easly pretule sunsses and strengths Sins it wos & basi acu: ton that the Trame shoul be strong enouah 10 develop the fll strength of the Infor the typeof restraint provided was considered that the matensl of Which ft was. made was not important fv Helf end that oly the stneses End srengihe telly mattered. The moment- | a6 610 | $60%10-* | 190.10" “B | 496203 [226% 10° 226% 10-* tects |BRRA0-5 336210 w Gog610| 36x10" 2353107 55s] si Sbeneto| 1e510-* 1732107 B [ores seoni0 | séoniw as 13383 ‘Sssei0| 123.10: | aoate tees [30 i TT [rose Fig) | ¢ ist 88 ho SSS ee [ 260 460 | [Tie | 6« 30x30) 122) 236 | ii | (9. st cts seat or ml sng ad he soy es cain ease pepe ‘ate tes onto pers 48188 mm ce "302 550519 Fen tered ime ton so Pe spacey Sana tahen 1400 fectodal rh nit and tv former cance ene bho nara tt om ee {hogs aprons Shah St om wate potons of Spee wae nd fae A be olin ce {Moc ein ih pm gap tt (2) Incing some rend lo @2F 9/092 Berna ot vey, (8) Keng tee ped sd evord fond ee getr to al to are (6) Seuming canes enencoent tobe als eben (8) Aopromae. Ssimats asta of eae ton ana.MAINSTONE y 4.10. Mean fo-defxion cvs for square mods wth ununtvend mie Shafi, fs teri ane rite res ston ml 19, ‘The patterns of cracking and subsequent crushing produced by the si nee et ndeeated move uniform éeribuons of ses inthe sis salen frames Other texts, wi te partial exception of those wth r shan ay ei Fig pd. Final cresing usual sok pce forend micros oet almost the entre width of the if The nial eres fay rani ove rcv, fa fom being completely uiform, prsuerably aise on a ofthe ramen were machined surfaces otha onl sal Because the ne ood be evaabe fo date the applied fads way fom fretionl fore we” “The importance at this tape of Feading of # et the cen Scr was illus the move urea dete ol phar hea re enforced rro-onerete ini to the normal rem Se Pee Stil shear consevon was proved by the threading ol {heretatorcement throuah the frame = enforce tg ferences between the scrnconstets and m wa acibtans or walls wee a greater feasiness ofthe ater bricksork itis dferent maner of cushing. The readiness ofthe te clOW THE STIFENESSES AND STRENGTHS OF INFILLED FRAMES | seca] Lest > Fig, 11. Moon lond-deflesion cures for square models with model-brickwone Ini eye hom sarin elds a hit ings show homie brickwork to crack no doubt resulted from local weaknesses in the mortar Joins accentuated, perhaps, by the obliquity of the loading thoushy once ted, the cracks usually ran through both mortar and brick. The di ference in the manner of crushing noted withthe sfencd Tiskage suerounds bas characteristic also of inflls with the different framed surrounds snd even, With the ation af small percentages of reinforcement to the micro-conerete ‘The failure ofthe miceo-conerete was always more sudden and usually entail ‘amore rapid subsequent loss of strength ofthe composite system. The alure ‘Of the model brickwork, being more gril, wrualysttaled 2 markedly tess "api los of strong 21. The behaviour ofthe model brickwork appeared to be very smile to that ofthe brickwork ip the flaca texts A generally more aniorm dit bution of eracking Sn the full-scale tests as compared with the corresponding ‘model ones indicated tha there was much more bend and/or Fiction atthe Interfaces with the Frames in the full-scale specimens. This was most novice: able in the final full-scale test, when the sess distibution was checked by Strain measurements A significant diference with the opposite eect 6MAINSTONE Fig. 12, Mean fotd-defieion curves for different infil fr square adsl with frames 8 ond nominal fl lacs only ‘between the model and full-scale normal trames was thatthe cleated joints of the latter opened out appreciably at high loads. No comparable opening vas possible in the modes ‘Suitesses and strengths “Ba Three sels of comparisons of Joad-defesion relationships for square model specimens and a further set for the comparable fullscale specimecs fre reproduced in Figs 10-13. The carves in each case, are the means forall Similar tents eividual tests usually gave somewhat indetereninae ital Sistness due to sight bedding down rotations of the specimens. The ongin ius therfore boen taken, in each case, as that of the tangent to the inal fincse part of the carve. Loads caried by te frames are ploted spy as those that they would have eared without a infil aero, oF course, forthe Siened linkages). They this exclude the additonal totds actually carries SUNS oh changes in the mode of deformation. These ate included inthe outs nominally carried by the infils, which aro plottod a the dilerences Ipetnco the total loads carried bythe compesitespstems and those that weal have been carriod by the frames alone 35. "The dimensiness hase of the plots is related to the concept of an ‘eqaivatent diagonal strat which il) he deusted farther in §)44-40ON THE STIFENESSES AND STRENGTHS OF INFILLED FRAMES o«.——_______ Fig. 13, Load-detexion cuves for ullscalaspecimans: hoa tines shew nom ‘tame loads and ight line show eomina nila Rio’ denotes the nominal diagonal load caried by the inl asa propor- tion of the maximum load that could be eased i falture occurred bY Simul: taneous crushing. over the full width »/~ The term Rew’ denotes the ‘nominal load on the frame inthe se manner, in terms of the character istes ofthe infil The tem Adis the mean slagonl strain, 24, "When represented in the same way, tbe behaviour of the non-square ‘model specimens was generally similar to thet ef the squere mocels The fechaviour of individual panes in specimens with two or four iafls Was also _zenraly similar 10 that ofthe sinale-panel species, 25. Figures 14-16 show the individual Tosddefiexion curves for each square spesimen with type B or C normal Irame ind with a model brickwork {nf and filled top joint. Two alternative bas: hive been adooicd het for estimating the separate loads carried by frames and inl. In Figs 1S and 16 the basis sas in Figs 10-13, e. the free loads are those which would have been ‘ken by the frames aldne and the infil loods a the diferences between {hese frame loads and the total loads carried. "In Fis. 14 the frame losds ate, however, estimated those actualy carved by the frames mhen subjected ‘the outward reactions ofthe infill and thus constrained to deiet tn a sier mode. The estimates woro based on the observed modes of deformation and ‘ue only approximate in the elastic region. Only the limits between wichMAINSTONEON THE STIFFNESSES AND STRENGTHS OF INFILLED FRAMES e ® Fig, 16. Load-dellenon curves fr indvival square models with modal-blekwork {nls snd famee ©; contnuods nas show nominal nil loads ad the broken ine thenominl frome ond ‘those estimates fay are shown to avoid confusion. ‘The infil loads were again bbiained a differences between the Total loads and the frame loads, but ‘ere they may be said fo represent more truly the loads actualy carved by the inl No corrspondin: st of curves given forthe specimens with type C {fumes bectse the changes inthe mode of deformation were much less marked and leg eaty to observe precisely. "Zo. Though the fl loud are not shown on a dimensionless bassin these ‘thre figures, some correction bas been made for the different unit strength of| ‘themodel brickwork in diferent specimens. Tey ae al shown as for a unit Crushing strength of 93. MNiavt Since the crushing strenaths were not ‘measured dreetly foreach specimen but merely estimated from control tests fn the bricks and mori, Past of the sealer sen in the figures may still ‘cull fom diferenos inthe brickwork sell. A contributory facto to these {iterences was probsbly the long period over which the tests were spread, ‘which resulted in several diferent assistants being engaged in turn in making the specimens, For similar specimens with miero-concrete infil, for which the contol specimens gave a more ditect Indication of the wait strengths, the eiters were siuifisatly fxs. "To the extent that they were not dus 10 Sifernees in the average unit stengths of che inl, chey must have been {elated to local variations of strength and stfness within the inflls and prob bly to slight variations fa closeness of inital 6t in the fame, Mashed ‘iferences in the Pattcrns Of cracking snd crushing for nominally similar Specimens were cle eidence of such variations, 37. The points made in 8 28-35 will be noted from an examination of Figs 10-16, ” nMAINSTONE 28. The caters of the evo alternative sets of curves of derived inf loads {or particular series of test in Fias 1d and 15 are nt significantly different. 129." ‘The seater the exuralsinesse of the beams and columns in elation to the uni avength ofa particular inl, the greater in genera isthe increase fn composite stength brought about by the if 30. Gross inal lack of fit of the infil, a8 typed by a continuous gap at the top reduces the maximum load attained and leads to'a much more marked Joss of stifnes. (The curve illustrating this in Fig. Ili the mean of four ‘curves snd i considerably smoother than any of them. The atu behaviours Srere characterized By repeated! sden drops in load as the inl slipped! an rotated slightly within the frame) 3 Sight oponing of the joints in the siened linkages ted to marked seduction in the slfnesees ani srengths oF the walls as compared with those ‘ofthe infil tothe stitened frames 32. All specimens continued to show strengths sell above those of the frames alone oven afer extensive cracking and crashing of the walls or ills, ‘but the higher peak nominal insill loads associated with ster frames were also associated with more rapid subsequent losses in strength for sil of a particular material, (This variation in effective ductility was clearly related {o the manner of fllue. High peak inl lds sesulted from almost simol- taneous crushing over substantial wish ofthe infil, which allowed further deftexion to oveu against relatively slight rontthe infil. Low peak Ini Toads, oa the other hand, involved in ore limited extent of Crushing. "Further deflexon therfore eatailedclther a progressive extension ‘of this crushing or a marked and susiained Beneficial change inthe mode of| ‘formation ofthe frame as see in Figs 3 and 5.) 33. The diferene setween the elfexive duties of model-brickwork and ricro-concrete infil tha hiss already been noted was not much acted by the ‘Sdaltion of small proportions of reinforcement to the latte: peak inl strensths Sere increased ut the subsequent losses in stteagth were similar to those ‘thot the reinforcement. ‘34. Asa corollary ofthe fairly rapid losses of infil strength associated with high’ pouk ‘values and extensive inital crushing, the maximum composite Strengths sometimes fell short ofthe sums ofthe separate peak noma al land Irame strengths whon the later were not teachot untl the delenons were Considerably greater than those at which crushing st occurred 35. The full-scale specimens were touch suitor inlly than the corre sponding mods! specimens fut the peak nominal nil strengths were propor Honately loner with slightly improved effctive ductiliies. ‘These sre the ferences that would be expected to result From the other observed dllerences in behaviour already noted.” 36. Repeated loadine of foar specimens with micro-conerete infil with the loads applied in alternate dictions every five cyles at amplitudes first of ‘about 30% of the norel maximum and then of about 757, did not impair ‘ier the stiffness or strength But fed ever to some gsin in strength Discussion 37. Full analysis showed that, of the two alternative approaches 10 practical design method mentionsd in the introduction, the concept of an ™ON THE STIFFNESSES AND STRENGTHS OF INFILLED FRAMES “able 2. Moon measured compost stots for tamed square modes an fr sl Tultsoale spinon comperad wth eximates based on equation (1) oli Of My lb al measured values oxcopt for rome 8 Frome] Iai) | Bao tint ie eek lng, ai | | | easy = iro | ton comes) | ty ‘ BE ywselon| 2 liglen 13) 9a BBE Sie) 13 ae a | o20 1238 BERR SH | S828 yn ie B ie ee @ ie 083 BRE OB) I EE om bat) Os 5 $33) 158 |Sa0| 83 Se 1 ou) tas 23s) ig rary i Se) 13s (fe 15 38 i 8) RNG) Mi 300! OF i SB) 1 gm) 3 U8 be 2 HOB |SH| Tat (540) 2a ees ‘eauivalent diagonal strut was generally preferable to the interaction formula ‘rigivally proposed or any simple variant oni. "38. Denoting the separate racking sttengibs ofthe open frame and ofthe inflas an waamed wall ae Py and Ay respectively, the interaction fermla gave the composite racking strength, Hy a w= {1 aH tit) oO wo For the best Bt to the reslls of the intial fullscae tests, Wood suspested putting »=2. The manner in which Hy was to be determined was not defined prior. Inthe oss somewhat arbitrary leading arrangement had been Used Sind it was impict that this, of something similar, should be regarded as Standard. For design st was suggested that, fo brickwork, estimates should bbeased on 1 horizontal shearing stress of O33 MIN 39. Table analyses tho results ofall he fll-scae ests and the mean results ‘of the principal sales of (sts on framed square models. (The formula is ‘early Inapplicable tothe texts made with sifened Inkages surrounding the ‘walls) | Values of H wore calulated both for moasarod vals of the sparate Iva strength, Hq. and for estimated values based on tho Suggested shoar Strength for brickwork and a shear strngth of 1-00 MIN/to for the micro onereie used, Measured composite suengths will be seen to range widely ‘oth above and below the estimates either basis. "To equalize them inal, ses WOUId eall fora very wide range of vals of “Wo. “There appeared 10 be thre principal reasons for the fans of this otmiua to pve more consistent peedi-tons of the composite strengtns 8MAINSTONE (o) All values of Hy, excent the measured values for the models with Ihjero-concrete infil, ested toa diferent mode of faire from that ‘ecrmining he vompositestengih to tenileor shear failure rather than to crushing. ) The values of fy did not adequately reflect the Rexuralsiffnesses and Mfrcngtis of the beams and columns in all cases, being largely ‘determined bythe strengths atthe joints. (o Ths composite strength war sometimes reached, particulary in the Me delete, when the loud earied by the Frame was sil well below its maximus 41. The failure ofthe equivalot disgomal strut conoept to represent the fll range of behavior ofan infil in all cases was prima faceless serious from the Jalatot view of presicing these composite strengths. It did not appsas to be BoniBeaot whee the frame was relatively sf or was efletivelysuifened by SBtecnt las (as epresented by the siflened beams and columos of frames Dine ). "The behaviour ater eracking did then atleast approximate to that Shown i Fig 2). Tt was probably more significant ducing the later stapes ‘Srloading wth atively weak frames suchas frames Band 1. The behaviour {hen war more lke that shovin in Fig. 2(d) Tt raised the question of whethes Etptabie predictions of composite stiflesses and strengths could still Be ‘Sbiedned in these circumstances n terms of nomical coetcbutions by the frame Shinn seated to the simple basic model of Fig, 20); but the range of Be- HOR served in replicate teste with frame B yrade it necessary to adopt a ap liberal cnterion of acceptability andthe general import ofthe comparison Eigy woative apportionment ofthe otal Toad to frameand ini in Figs 14 and 25 ee that there would be litle i any practical advantage in predictions bosed ‘Soscly on the actual behaviour as analysed in Fig 14. Attention ws therefore Cee fluod on sxpeseene the observed stenaths and siffnesses of all spec, SESW Simple sure of the strengths and slifneses of the frame alone 2nd ‘hoes of equvalen single diagonal struts (asin Figs 10-13 and 15 and 16) 408 Sees Slng the latter to basic design parameters forthe walls and if. ‘Thue SRA nat ollows references 1 te strengths and sifneses ofthe frames and ins are to be understood in this way, R= RGR of RRR. @ Kn RIB ° where Ris the diagonal Joed on the inilld frame at any delexion, Ri the bere Faas on the infil considered as an equivalent single diagonal strut, sar ciagonal Toad that would be caried fy the frame without inl at Fee Gefenion and k's isthe compresiv sess ofthe iil considered ‘bpain ay an equivalent single diagonal teu, si oS Mas found convenient to define the equivalent struts by dimension- Jest paramneers Jw where w= Cith suse: A and eating to mean stitiness Here iachang and to crushing srength respectively) denotes the withs of Pre aig staneed struts of the same fength d which would have the same fessor strength asthe infil, © wae = Kad JE ® siving Wi! = KialB'tsin 20 * andON THE STIFFNE SAND STRENGTHS OF INFILLED FRAMES and Wa = RY wing wale’ = Rufw't o 48, The sme concep is much hss relevant tothe strenath determined by the fist crack rather than by crushing, bu Te was convenient also fo expeess {hin sho sme terns asthe evshing suength bya further parameter. Welw = Rufew't © "The modulus of elasticity and crushing sirenth, #° af, were determined ‘as nated atthe foot of Table Tn paticular they were akan or brickwork, 2s those for normal compressive londing perpendicular the hed joins, which ‘ens thatthe “eguivalnt struts envisaged as having joints perpendicular {6 the loaded diagonal and that any weakening du toa diferent alignment in ‘the actual inf recognizad by reduced values of w “44 Teas clear Irom the general considerations outined in the introduction that the principal influences on WwW were likely tobe some of the following: (@) the Rexoraf stiffness of the beams and colurnas of the bounding frame relative to the siete ofthe wall off (@) any eutrnal sestrains which effectively increase these Hera sti Insees, such those that woul Be exert by infill on the Opposite ‘es of the beams and column; (© the roxatonalstlfnesses of the joints of she frame relative t0 the HHenural stilneses of the bexins snd columns (id) tho extent to whi the jonts open under Toad; (6) the ratio forthe il (the closeness of the initial fof the inl in the Frame. 45. ‘The main emphsis in toss with frames B, C, 1 and 2 was on (2) and “Tests with surrounds and frames A, Dang 3, copsidesed both in telation ‘one another and in relation to the other tot, threw forther light on the infcnce of (2), fo) and f)- "The fon tests wilt preformed aps above the {afi indicated alls, an upper bmi to the Weakening effect Of a poor initial a ‘46, The most significant influsnce on the values of ww’ desived from the moasured sinescs and strengths was found to be the Poxura sifaesses of the columns sid beams (Ef? and ENP ip cerns of load or Elli and EEX ip tras of intensity of load) relative to he stiffness of the fll under luniform disgonal compression (E'tw'd~ Er sia 22 9 terms of the diagonal load or £1 sin 2000 and #928)" im terms of orm ylensity of load on the cofuinns apd hears respectively). Convenient measures of this relative sfiffnss ave the dimension = parameter fe. ann gf Eee o ( ‘ and: ® in which, as previously pointed out ty Smith," the teens % and 3 are fmilae to the pavarntor whose recinrosl i krona the characteristic length inthe general solution ofthe equation serning the analogous behaviour of beam on an clastic foundation es Append).MAINSTONE ig 17. Vatations of strong of square inl of model bichon 141. "The range of relative stlfinesss explored in the tests was not wide endugh to dsctminate between Ah and Af. It would seem preferable to cere the two, ut there mas n9 indication that this would be juste in Soe eee vibe thereto preset the rvs Of the tess i fms solely Pra x wl be seen from the Baus, this is 3 conservative chotce # the Sretthe Se auras it il frequently be if £3 f increased 10 allow for the Sterne effects of floor sibs and of ails above and below the one considered, Shnth has claimed some experimental confirmation for 3 similar chow" arc eet on aguere and mon-equare specimens ate ploted separately. thet cunes were drawn nally 10 give the best ft to the mean values of rem Pon cingle static Toadings of al squate specimens with normal nisi. weep ot refoncement) and normal frames. Diferent curves ha 10 Be Bee. BaP Godeltviskwork and microsconerete inl, but they were drawn 7—— ] | soe, ! | tered | hoon nce | | 3 wal ose at / | | oot Fig, 18. Vrtion strengths of on-squae infill of mod an fl-scsebikwork 0 thatthe siengthe and stiffness indicated for micro-concrete infls ate, iat corresponding values of ify always rospoctisely 50", greater and 33% Tess than those for miodsl-brickworkinfile (se Append). "The greater observed Sirengths ofthe micro-conerete falls upto fist rack ware clearly related to the greater rainess of the model bickvark to crack (whether oF Hot conte buted 10 by the obliquity of the loading relative to the ed joins), and the [reste uifatesrcneths may be atteibuted tothe same case since the more fxtensve eraling of she model brickwork dacupted the effective struts 10.9 (Beater extent bslove crushing occurred. The sotsewhat pacadoxialy greater Dhserved sins: of te model brickwork sills (housh less wel established because ofe restr Tishility to eror of the estimates of Eas compare with those off) probably stemmed from a diferent Local stress dstnbuton ia the highly stfesed losded corners and Tess dewimental change in the effective fxd at these hish stresses a compared with show forthe micro~onereteMAINSTONE "I Sse =) Fig. 19, Versions of srenghs of square infil of miero-conctete “The fit ofthe points represenins non-squsse model specimens with normal frames tthe same see of curves (sbich have imply been redrawn on Figs 18, 20,33 and 24) seme good enovish, it tlation 10 the scatters, 0 justify the use (of te same relationships between Iw" ard Af fora key values of 149. In elation tothe tests just considered, those with mae square normal rams il fing oF teiforced rails show the Feductions in stength and stiffness resulting from 21085 lack of and the much fess signiant eects of Tinforcement. The generally beneficial eects of prior repeated loading up to about 75%, ofthe ultimate foad wil aso be seen 30. "The tess withthe stifened frames D compare well with those with normal frames on the tase of the maximum Mexurat stflesss ofthe beams {Bhd colurnns but show 8 considerably enhanced performance If the stifaesses ‘ofthe joints are taken se the bass of comparison. From this it san be von ‘ludod thatthe rotational characterises oF tbe ois are ellie unitporiant 0ON THE STIFFNESSES AND STRENGTHS OF INFILLED FRAMES feare Fi, 20. Vorotions of arenas of nen-squte nls of miro-concete ng that. insofar as she stiffening ofthese frames simulated the restraints that ‘Mould Bs ofoted by aujacent infil, considerably enhanced ultimate serengths wil rest from sech resins. Somes confirmation of this was given by the Tesisonforbay speciten: Fg. 9)- Incomparison, the tests wih thestifened Tinkape surrounds. show ¢seweskenng effect of 4 shuht opening of te outs ‘The sila alight opening af te joint of Ihe fillsosle frames seems to be he couse of thet digbtly ower strengths 48 compared with the coreesponging fodele The greater ita! stifineses achieved tn the fullscale tests a5 a ule of more uniform sil stress Uistbutions in the infils are, however, ‘ery notceabe, S1. The assesment of the teraction formula, equation (1, in Table 2 fgiviod the sears oF the individual obrervotions sshereas Pigs 17-24 Emphasize thom, To provise 4 more direct comparative asessment of the SMtemative equrvaent siut conospe and to llustate, at the same tne, is | |MAINSTONE —— LI | we i Th 5 lo | | | | N © e | 7] BN 8 | : | SE | oe cee —- : | | j 5 | oe isang] | ae Fi. 21. Variation of stitneses of squat itis of ode! brickwork application, Tables 3 and 4 re-analyse the mean observations forthe samme {roup of specimens in Ler of ths alternative St. Table 3 which covers mont other square mores and nclaes values of the siandard deviation forthe roll of the principal dl tet, rstanalyscs the validity ofthe enimate of the inl contributions ta the cormposite Be Fpaviour glen directly by the curvesin Fags 17-24. Tabled extends the arabs for ereshing fare of the infil by denving composite horizomal cacking, Stengths, Hf, from the estimates of Wj (= Rf tin Fable 3 and son pring them; asin Table wth the measured composite stents For ths pats have boon calculated simply a: We eB o Hy ~ Rc cos@ 9)ON THE STIFFNESSES AND STRENGTHS OF INFILLED FRAMES ae if 7 ae ig, 22. Vatations of stitfesss of non-square ifs of mods! and ful-seale ek wom ‘Thas no account fas been taken of the fact that the measured composite strengths were reached in many model ests wher the fead carried bythe frame ‘asst yell below 77 and the last suggested reso forthe Salle of the ‘ction formula #0 give better predictions of Jf stil operative Ms elect most noticeable with frame C. Nevertheless 3 marked inyproverten 9 the ‘simates of H,88 compared with thovs in Table 2, apparent, Conetusions 53, The tests amply confiemed thatthe range of possible behaviour of am Infllod frame is much wider than that exsisaped by any theoretical analy yet undertaken ="! Fairly wide variations wore oberrsd even betwen nominally identical specimens a: rsvll! presumably. of diferent toc a| rena netgear oo «—| to, | oe | § | LJ} Fig. 22. Varitons of sttnosses of squats infils of mic cone variations of elasticity and seength of the infill materials and slight variations inthe inal Be ofthe il. Sh. For design purpoies only faitly simple method of predicting the incase in siflanse ane stength due ¢0 the presence of infil seems t0 be Risied, Of uns two aternouves, the concept ofthese increnses a being de 1 Ggutatont Gigomal struts fits the fll ange of Behaviour explored much bates than an interaction formala inking the composite strength tothe rparatesrcngihs ofthe frame without infil andthe inl as an waftamed wal ihougi it can be justited theoretically ony for bohasiour peor to cracking It th expense of alloting thre different values Yo the effective width pars: imcter hin itis aloo moe versatile im that eras predictions of stifesses nd of sirengths up fo st crack aswell a5 of ultimate strengths Se rie not possible to sugget dcaied rules for design without ceomidering the bai of desiga fr the frame ws a whoke on the one hard and the asON THE STIFFNESSES AND STRENGTHS OF INFILLED FRAMES | [9 Sed Sa act Fig. 24, Vaiations of stfnesee of non-squa infil of mcr canere basis of estimation of the characteristic clastic and sirensths of the ‘aterals f he init on the other. Assuming thatthe rls we considered Es pingjoiated diauonal struts effective only in compression but either de oral as recued. that all frame membcr= ani joints have enough strength ftemsile where nesenary) to develop the roquted infill strengths without fppreiable opening of ths Joint amd that ‘arations in the materials ofthe Inf are adequately alowed for by faioss on che-design moduli and ait Strengths, fs considered thatthe eucies In Figs 17-24 provide # bass for predicting the sifnesscs and strengths of these strus in terms of relate illness paramstez, ih defined By equation (7) 36. These curves ghe base sllgsces and stenaths in terms of Ef (determined as stated at the foot ef Table 1 and the dimensions ofthe inl ‘They are applicable to nnele unbonded and unseinforeed ins constructed Wvth uffcent care to ensue thatthe joints wih te frame are well led and (0 6MAINSTONE Toblo,2. Moan maasuted inil'sitfnases and avengtsfor square modes anf ai Tate ener th cetnstsoaned on yh aa te curves gs 17, Frame] Init [Relave] fail sins (t) | Hn cracking | oil crushing wee Rep | ATEN opts | ope diss | 0733 | 0129 | owe | ovis | O20 dos | 0199 | oom | 0102 dty | OF | gosh, Boss | 80s i 0.060 | O05 | 0133 | 0183 ois | gear | gam | eae | ait | a | {3 Foe Stas Seinen chp 8 ee ere CF avout repeat and revere, {3} oe Becca rfred al (2 auaear te ib ea seins 9 oer elon static or quasistatic loading but aged no; be reduces on secount of prior etic MatGee this docs not exceed, =a), 507, of the ulimate, For infil sur dead es by other infil valucs of Hy calcuteted without allowanes Farah is above and belo: could probably be halved ith a lower limit of Fs tr ne punpow of eaumating timate strengths. Mf constrtion isnot aa ae arene filed joints between the rare and the iil the lster wil Sat enribute to th composts strenaths and sfinesses but reliance On See puller im denign fs aot recommended. No allowance forthe mote Pa aa Ghsuibutions of stew in the early stages of loading when there i & pene pond ora shear bey between the ill and the frame can be suusested, 8ON THE STIFENESSES AND STRENGTHS OF INFILLED FRAMES {sue yo suoneese ) games emt 95 oMAINSTONE tt was clear from the full-scale tess that much higher siffwesses might De athed, but further tering would be required to establish what allowanc> ‘ould be made. ve Pe ovided chat dhe peripheral joints between the fil and the frame ase wal filed, the composite susie stifaess ofthe infiled frame wil usuly be hekey at of the il, The composite dlagonal compressive sifiness may tHE Re onsarvatvely taken as A and determined directly ftom w ys/v/ and Sahin The horizontal racking sifiaess wil hen be K's os" 8 at cate strengths up to frst rack may also be conservatively taken ‘as Hoseat te nls sone, sins the load cari by the frame at the deflxion aan cles he Het crack is usualy golatively small, ‘These strengths ry set rccrectniad equally ivectly from wt” and equation (6, the hewi- omit racking strength being taken &s By co @ no Similarly conservative eximates of composite witimat strengths could toe obtained directly from w'" Using Heteny¥s notation, the deren 98OW THE STIFENESSES AND STRENGTHS OF INFILLED FRAMES ‘auaton for an unloaded scction of 2 eam on a foundation with sn else rod ‘hoe Wdenoing a reaton hype unt Fegth othe Bes for 3 defexion 9) ay ei = ky si the goreral stb Fn SME 698 + Cem 85) +E, 60S NEC, Sm AN) snhere aaa and Cy Cy Cy and Cy ste constants dependent on the loading and end conions "ah "The tr sin 9 nthe parameters dined In equations (7) ana (8) eecognzss snc obiqy ofthe suite reutions tec te nl a the eblamns snd Beans, f= Ets 29h or Ein 280 ‘64. The empirical cores i Flgs 17-24 may te rprenated by the following relations upto wae of 2h between four and fre wasle’ wO17S(4a "for brickwork or D115 Q4h)-2* for conctete Tellwe SOT Gk) for bskwork or 0255 Oh) 8", for coneste SR LOSE Ghee for mrckiork oF O84” Ugh) 8 for conte For hice vals of the ets indicts leer reductions in Ww han those sven by hee sceionhip a the paves are terfore Rttened. “Over the Whale ngs le test they may be closely approteated By tha relationships Werins = B1G(A)-° foe brickwork of O11 Cy)" for concrete b= Bis tanh for brickwork or 022 (44)-©? for conerate TE) 2052 08s) fe bekvork 9 O78 Gyh)-F# for concrete References 1. Woon R, H. Thestabiity of al ouldings, Pree in Cie, Engrs, 1958, 11, ‘o-102 2. Toss .G. The strength of brickworks Stract, gy 1953, 31, 4-46 3 Mancrowe RJ" Bisuston on acl framer wih Beck work abd concrete Malling’ Proc nun Cie Engr 193, 33,5038 4. Mangrose RC aid Werks GA. The inigenes of @ bounding ame on the aching sesso andstrenthsoi beck walle Pre. 2afineraron Brick Iason conference 1910, 165-17, 5. Wooo ne Dison om the sabi of tall buildings eae. ln Ct Ene 199,12 517 S18 6. Pout SV, Or he teraction between masonry ile walls and ensioving eae wen loadin te plane of the wall. arsaions ov eeingah Groncerine aruake Enginering Research Insti, SanFrancico,1960, sean, 17, Smrot fi $._ Behaviour of square nfl feames. Pree, Ant. Soe. Cle. Ene, "965, 92, STI, 381-4, & sun B'S. The compote bebaviur of ified ames. Tal builds. organ Presn, Oclrd, 1960, 81-472 9, Sante, 9 Matbods fo proditng the tera sifness and srength of mat Morey niles frames. Rl St, T9912 287-257 10, Sarra B'S and Cretes C._ A method of analsi for fale fame. Proc “hstn Cin Exar 1909. 44 31-8, 11, Mangoes Ro Dissasion on the composite tehaviour af ified fam Tal Bags. Peantaon Drei, Osta, V967, 49-498, 12, GUY GD, dehaour of rafoee! conto sheor wes under sai oat Macsachusete Inia of Teche, 19S 88ENATHQUIKE € MAINSTONE 13, PoryaKoy S. V. Masonry in framed buldngs (en iestigation ito th ironath “tel hifess of mason fling). Moscow, 1988. (Engsh transaion by Chins’ GL, 1960. 14, Sucunnser 8.” Anal ofthe carthguske fsstance of frame bailing aking ‘me consideration she carrying capacity of ie Ailing masons Proceedings tthe and ord conference om earthquake opicering, Teo, 190, 3.2127 2161 15, Mutnice D. aad Sevan RTT tebuotour of afd frames unde tt Iosding, Pro. Iam Cis Engr, 1967, 98, 639-656. 16, sonst Msi! arse with brickwork and concrete ining. Proc. Ins ‘he Ents, 1961, 19, 478-878 17 Herat Mf, Beams on elastic fowdations, University of Michigan) Pres, ‘Aan Arbor, 1346 2-4 18, Tivommsie 8, Siengh of materials, Part I, Van Nostrnd, Princeton, 1956, Srdedn, 12. Prone }4-DAY (UEBB3I9(0) RETTIOYIFO DESKS FHOMERRRECES BER AONED ‘and iltinan Sk, Pa rena ces) 20, 9803 Sch UBRARY pa Wotan Bt esos 9104 USA 80