The elastic properties of concrete under bi-axial loading . ere expansometers vvere on the vertical arm and on the cross,increments of load of ISOOO-lb. were applied simultaneously tothe two arms. The expansometers were read imagediately afterthe desired load v^as reached, and another increment the nominal load of SOOOO-lb. the horizontal load ras re-moved to chan^e gauges on the piimp, and the expansometers werereset after the load had been reapplied. At a vertical load of133000-Ib. and a horizontal load of lOOOOO-lb. no cracks orother signs of failure could be found o
The elastic properties of concrete under bi-axial loading . ere expansometers vvere on the vertical arm and on the cross,increments of load of ISOOO-lb. were applied simultaneously tothe two arms. The expansometers were read imagediately afterthe desired load v^as reached, and another increment the nominal load of SOOOO-lb. the horizontal load ras re-moved to chan^e gauges on the piimp, and the expansometers werereset after the load had been reapplied. At a vertical load of133000-Ib. and a horizontal load of lOOOOO-lb. no cracks orother signs of failure could be found on the specimen, but theload fell off rapidly. After standing about one minute, duririgwhich time the vertical load fell to 113000-lb., more load wasapplied. The maximum vertical load v.^as 137000-lb., or 2140lb. per , and the maximum horizontal load was 105000-lb.,or 1540 lb. per Failure occurred in the vertical arm,showing a distinct splitting and bulging on two opposite the sketch on page 248. The horizontal load was not increased. 70 after 105000-lb. because the small crocsed pieces between thejaclc and the plate on the end of the specimen had failed, andadditional pumping threw the jaclv out of line. 2059. The arrangement of expansoraeters and the incrementsof load were the same as for 2054. After four increments ofload, the expansometer on the cross had scarcely moved, so it wasdisturbed and reset to the same reading. Load was removed fromthe horizontal arm and reapplied twice during the test to changethe bearir^g pieces. The maximum vertical load v/as 145000-lb.,or 2200 lb. per and the maximum horizontal load was142500-lb. or 2200 lb. per Failure occurred in thevertical arm under tha maximian load while the horizontal loadwas 10000-lb. lo77er than its maximum. After the vertical armhad failed, the horizontal load was increased to its maximumcausing general failure in the horizontal arm and a verynoticeable splitting in the plane of bot
Size: 1348px × 1854px
Photo credit: © The Reading Room / Alamy / Afripics
License: Licensed
Model Released: No
Keywords: ., bookcentury1900, bookdecade1910, booksubjecttheses, bookyear1912
