Figure 8 – uploaded by V. Bolis

See full PDF downloadDownload figure

respectively. In Phase 1, the specimen highlighted a ductile cyclic behavior with negligible damage, — Figure 8 respectively. In Phase 1, the specimen highlighted a ductile cyclic behavior with negligible damage,

Related Figures (14)

he columns in 3 points and their static scheme differs from that of the central ones, as shown in Figure 1

In the first part of the test, a 4cm gap was left between the masonry sub-panels and the upper beam; while
M5 resistance class lime-cement mortar bed and cross joints (15mm thick). Table 1 reports the materials’
dimensions 250x200x190mm (LxTxH), characterized by a 50% voids ratio and a density of 810 kg/m°, and
To protect the masonry from local crushing after the filling of the gap, wooden boards were placed — In the first part of the test, a 4cm gap was left between the masonry sub-panels and the upper beam; while M5 resistance class lime-cement mortar bed and cross joints (15mm thick). Table 1 reports the materials’ dimensions 250x200x190mm (LxTxH), characterized by a 50% voids ratio and a density of 810 kg/m°, and To protect the masonry from local crushing after the filling of the gap, wooden boards were placed

behave as sliding joints during the in plane deformation and ensure the out-of-plane stability of the infill.

with continuous “shear keys” (Figure 4b), which were embedded in the masonry mortar during the infill

frame beams (Figure 5 5c and 5d). Such connection was obtained by first dowelling a “U” shaped steel
) by means of a saw and the successive integration of the vertical elements and their connection to the
gaps between the masonry sub-panels and the planks restored the continuity of the infill. Figure 6b shows
[he insertion of the planks in the wall required the execution of vertical cuts in the infill (Figures 5a and
he vertical planks detailing. Pairs of “L” shaped steel profiles were screwed on both sides of the planks, in
order to optimize the depth of the masonry out-of-plane arching and serve as a mold for the subsequent
kg/m?. The blocks were laid in running bond, with the holes in horizontal direction, on layers of a weaker — frame beams (Figure 5 5c and 5d). Such connection was obtained by first dowelling a “U” shaped steel ) by means of a saw and the successive integration of the vertical elements and their connection to the gaps between the masonry sub-panels and the planks restored the continuity of the infill. Figure 6b shows [he insertion of the planks in the wall required the execution of vertical cuts in the infill (Figures 5a and he vertical planks detailing. Pairs of “L” shaped steel profiles were screwed on both sides of the planks, in order to optimize the depth of the masonry out-of-plane arching and serve as a mold for the subsequent kg/m?. The blocks were laid in running bond, with the holes in horizontal direction, on layers of a weaker

ide of the wall, simulating the intervention from outside the building to limit the building downtime.

After the in-plane test, the specimen was tested out of plane, in order to evaluate its stability in presence of
specimen inter-storey drift, the load applied by the jack, the relative sub-panels vertical sliding and theit — After the in-plane test, the specimen was tested out of plane, in order to evaluate its stability in presence of specimen inter-storey drift, the load applied by the jack, the relative sub-panels vertical sliding and theit

limited damage at the end of the test Phase 1.

deformation and a creaking occurred at this load step. No cracks were detected in the masonry. action. The profile results by interpolating the measures of the gauges lined up at mid-height, whose

the infill, most probably thanks to the activation of the vertical arching mechanism spanning in between the
4,2. Specimen B
93KN applied, and no significant stiffness degradation was observed up to the maximum load of 102kN — the infill, most probably thanks to the activation of the vertical arching mechanism spanning in between the 4,2. Specimen B 93KN applied, and no significant stiffness degradation was observed up to the maximum load of 102kN

contribution of the rocking mechanism is lower than 1kN. However, in this case the infill reaction was
column and the adjacent vertical planks. Such gap was monitored during the test and its partial closure was — contribution of the rocking mechanism is lower than 1kN. However, in this case the infill reaction was column and the adjacent vertical planks. Such gap was monitored during the test and its partial closure was

The performance of the prototype infill built with vertical sliding joints is compared in Figure 14 with those

6. CONCLUSIONS