Recommended Dynamic Test Method for Determining the Seismic Drift Causing Glass Fallout from a Window Wall, Curtain Wall, and Storefront Systems

Transcription

1 Task Group Approval Methods of Test Committee Product Group Approval Successful Ballot # Successful Ballot ( ) Out for Ballot ( ) AAMA XX DRAFT #5 DATED 9/7/2017 Recommended Dynamic Test Method for Determining the Seismic Drift Causing Glass Fallout from a Window Wall, Curtain Wall, and Storefront Systems

2 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 SCOPE INTRODUCTION REFERENCED DOCUMENTS DEFINITIONS GENERAL NOTES TEST SPECIMENS TEST PROCEDURES APPARATUS SAFETY PRECAUTIONS PRODUCT QUALIFICATION TEST REPORT This voluntary specification was developed by representative members of AAMA as advisory information and published as a public service. AAMA disclaims all liability for the use, application or adaptation of materials published herein. AAMA XX, DRAFT #5, DATED 9/7/17 Copyright 2017 American Architectural Manufacturers Association 1900 East Gold Road, Suite 1250, Schaumburg, IL Phone: 847/ customerservice@aamanet.org Web Site: PAGE i

3 1.0 SCOPE 1.1 This method provides a means of determining the horizontal racking displacement amplitude of exterior wall system framing members that would cause fallout of representative architectural glass panels under controlled laboratory conditions. The test method provides a suggested default configuration, but may also be applied to project specific configurations. 1.2 This test method is a complement to AAMA 501.4, Recommended Static Test Method for Evaluating Windows, Window Wall, Curtain Wall and Storefront Systems Subjected to Seismic and Wind Induced Inter-sStory Drifts. AAMA focuses primarily on changes in serviceability of exterior wall system specimens(e.g., air and water leakage rates) as a result of statically applied, in-plane (horizontal) racking displacements parallel to the plane of the glass or other infill. In contrast, this test method AAMA focuses primarily on determining the dynamic fallout of glass from exterior wall system panels specimens that are representative of the overall exterior wall system being evaluated. Please refer to Section 6.1 for further clarification.thus, the AAMA test method focuses primarily on the seismic serviceability limit state behavior of wall systems, while this test method focuses on the seismic ultimate limit state behavior of architectural glass in a wall system or partition. 1.3 This test method is applicable to any type of glass panel installed in exterior wall system framing members, including the associated glazing components (setting blocks, gaskets, fasteners, etc.). NOTE 1: Other infill materials, spandrels, and/or rain screen cladding materials may be incorporated along with fenestration systems in full-size wall mockups. Applicability of this test method to these materials on specific projects shall be determined by the building engineer of record in consultation with the test agency. 1.4 The proper use of this test method requires an understanding of dynamic testing methods, displacement and time measurements, and the test apparatus design and controls required to accomplish the horizontal racking displacements. 1.5 This test method describes the definitions, test specimens, apparatus and procedures to be used to determine the dynamic drift that would cause glass fallout from a representative exterior wall system or partition architectural glass panel. 1.6 The primary units of measure in this document are metric. The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard. The values given in parentheses are for reference only. 1.7 This document was developed in an open and consensus process and is maintained by representative members of AAMA as advisory information Out of Scope This test method is limited to that which is practical and cost-effective. In the absence of project specification requirements to the contrary, the following items are out of scope: AAMA XX, Draft #5, Dated 9/7/2017 Page 1

4 a. Curved, segmented or saw-tooth walls b. Corners and splayed mullions c. Test specimens more than one lite in height d. Multi-story test specimens 2.0 INTRODUCTION 2.1 In the design of building wall systems to resist earthquakes, where glass-to-frame contacts cannot be avoided, or where glass selected is not from glass types that are highly resistant to earthquake-induced glass fallout, NEHRP Recommended Provisions for Seismic Regulations for New Buildings and Other Structures (NEHRP, 2000) call for the determination of fallout, which is defined as the relative seismic displacement (drift) causing glass fallout from the curtain wall, storefront or partition. The word seismic in the fallout definition implies that fallout shall be determined on the basis of dynamic motions. The purpose of this test method is to describe a dynamic racking crescendo test for determining Δfallout fallout, the in-plane dynamic drift/displacement causing glass fallout from a an glazed window, window wall, a glazed curtain wall panel, a glazed storefront panel, or a glazed partition panelexterior wall systems,, as an alternative to thea detailed engineering analysis. in According to the 2000 NEHRP Provisions, dynamic racking tests are not required when sufficient clearance exists between glass edges and wall frame glazing pockets to prevent contact during seismic design displacements in the main structural system of the building.asce 7, Eqnequation , which states that Δfallout>=1.25*IeDp. Ie is the importance factor for the structure based on its risk category as defined in ASCE 7, Chapter 1. Dp is the relative seismic displacement that the window system must mebe designed to accommodate (ASCE 7, Chapter 13). Dp is effectively the inter-story drift that is expected to occur in the structure when it is subjected to the design level seismic event. This inter-story drift for a given type of structure and it s associated risk category may not exceed the values established in ASCE 7, Table When an exterior wall system is attached to the building structure at each floor level (i.e. curtain wall system) and the height of the test specimens equals the floor to floor height then the relative seismic displacement is exactly Dp. However, the height of the test specimen is not required to be the same as the floor to floor height of the actual structure. In this castcase, the Dp for the test specimen is a ratio of the test specimen height to that of the floor to floor height of the structure multiplied by the Dp based on the structure floor to floor height. This is effectively an inter-story drift ratio or drift index as is expressed as a percentage of the typical structure floor to floor height (i.e. 0.7% to 2.5% per Table in ASCE 7). Using the inter-story drift percentage, the Dp for a test specimen of any height can be calculated. When a window system is attached to other exterior wall elements (i.e.e.g. ribbon windows attached to precast spandrel panels or punched window openings attached to metal stud wall framing) the seismic relative displacement that the window may be subjected to does not necessarily relate to the inter-story drift multiplied by the height of the test specimen. In these cases, how the other exterior wall elements are attached to the building structure and how the windows are attached to those elements must be properly evaluated in order to determine the appropriate Dp for the test specimen. A good discussion of this can be found in the commentary to Chapter 13 of NEHRP Recommended Seismic Provisions for New Buildings and Other Structures (FEMA P )2015 NEHRP P-1050 Provisions. 2.2 Extensive laboratory research reported in the open literature has indicated that in-plane (horizontal) dynamic racking motions are the most relevant and practical motions to be included in laboratory determinations of Δfallout for glass components (Wright, 1989; Thurston and King, 1992; Behr et al., 1995). AAMA XX, Draft #5, Dated 9/7/2017 Page 2

5 2.3 Glazing Support Conditions For any given rectangular lite, there are eight possible glazing combinations, all of which may occur on the same project, or be offered as part of a manufacturer s standard system: 1. Captured four sides without structural silicone glazing (SSG) 2. One vertical edge with SSG 3. Both vertical edges SSG 4. One horizontal edge SSG 5. Both horizontal edges SSG 6. Two adjacent edges SSG 7. Three adjacent edges SSG 8. Four-side SSG It is impractical to test all combinations, especially if interfaces between adjacent units are to be tested as well. NOTE 2: Any given project could have hundreds of unique frame/glass details, making comprehensive testing almost impossible. 2.4 It is the responsibility of the design professional or engineer of record to assess the adequacy of mockup testing in verification of code compliance. 3.0 REFERENCED DOCUMENTS 3.1 References to the standards listed below shall be to the edition indicated. Any undated reference to a code or standard appearing in the requirements of this standard shall be interpreted as to referring to the latest edition of that code or standard. 3.2 American Architectural Manufacturers Association (AAMA) AAMA XX, Recommended Static Test Method for Evaluating Windows, Window Wall, Curtain Wall and Storefront Systems Subjected to Seismic and Wind- Induced Inter-Story Drift American Architectural Manufacturers Association, Schaumburg, Illinois. AAMA CW-DG-1-96, Aluminum Curtain Wall Design Guide Manual, American Architectural Manufacturers Association, Schaumburg, Illinois. 3.3 Applied Technology Council (ATC) ATC 24 (1992), Guidelines for Cyclic Seismic Testing of Components of Steel Structures 3.4 ASTM International (ASTM) ASTM E564-95, Standard Practice for Static Load Test for Shear Resistance of Framed Walls for Buildings, Annual Book of ASTM Standards, American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania American Society of Civil Engineers AAMA XX, Draft #5, Dated 9/7/2017 Page 3

6 ASCE 7-160,- Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures Commented [JC1]: References to this document are to be reviewed by staff 3.65 Federal Emergency Management Agency FEMA P (2015)-, NEHRP Recommended Seismic Provisions for New Buildings and Other Structures 3.76 International Code Council IBC 2015,- International Building Code 3.87 Additional Resources Behr, R.A., Belarbi, A. and Culp, J.H., 1995, Dynamic Racking Tests of Curtain Wall Glass Elements with In-plane and Out-of-plane Motions, Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, Vol. 24, No. 1, pp Behr, R.A. and Belarbi, A., 1996, Seismic Test Methods for Architectural Glazing Systems, Earthquake Spectra, Vol. 12, No. 1, February 1996, pp Thurston, S.J. and King, A.B., 1992, Two-Directional Cyclic Racking of Corner Curtain Wall Glazing, BRANZ Study Report No. SR44, Building Research Association of New Zealand, Judgeford, New Zealand, p. 11, p. 13. Wright, P.D., 1989, The Development of a Procedure and Rig for Testing the Racking Resistance of Curtain Wall Glazing, BRANZ Study Report No. SR17, Building Research Association of New Zealand, Judgeford, New Zealand, p. 7, p. 13. Memari, A. M., Kremer, P.A., and Behr, R. A., (2012). Seismic Performance of Stick-Built Four-Side Structural Sealant Glazing Systems and Comparison with Two-Side Structural Sealant Glazing and Dry-Glazed Systems, Journal of ASTM International (JAI), Vol. 1, No. 1, July 2012, pp Broker, K.A., Fisher, S., and Memari, A.M., (2012). Seismic Racking Test Evaluation of Silicone Used in a Four-Sided Structural Sealant Glazed Curtain Wall System, Journal of ASTM International (JAI), Vol. 9, No. 3, March 2012, pp Memari, A.M., Chen, X., Kremer, P.A., and Behr, R.A., (2006). Seismic Performance of Two-Side Structural Silicone Glazing Systems, Journal of ASTM International (JAI), Vol. 3, No. 10, October 2006, pp DEFINITIONS Please refer to AAMA Glossary (AG-13) and the AAMA Skylight Council Glossary for all definitions except for those appearing below (which apply only to this guide).refer to AAMA AG-08, AAMA Glossary, for all definitions. 4.1 Delta Glass Cracking ( cracking)- The relative seismic drift/displacement at which initial glass cracking is visually noted. AAMA XX, Draft #5, Dated 9/7/2017 Page 4

7 4.2 Delta Glass Fallout ( fallout)- Per ASCE 7-10, fallout is the relative seismic displacement (drift) at which glass fallout from the curtain wall, storefront, or partition occurs. Glass fallout is considered to have occurred when an individual glass fragment or an accumulation of glass fragments 650 mm 2 (1.0 in 2 ) in area > 14 g (0.5 oz.) in mass falls in any direction from the test panel glazed opening. 5.0 GENERAL NOTES 5.1 Curtain Exterior wall systems and storefront systems often include glazed panels with different sizes, aspect ratios, glass types, glass edge clearances, etc. Once an exterior wall system is selected, the specifier must identify the various glass panels to include in the fallout test plan in order to encompass glass panel configurations within the exterior wall system that have the highest potential for glass fallout. When uncertainty exists, the specifier shall consider additional specimen configurations in the test plan. Usually, fallout test specimens include those glass panels in the exterior wall system having the largest glass area, the thinnest glass, the most vulnerable glass type (NEHRP 2000, Part 2 Commentary), the most vulnerable glazing system type, the smallest glass-to-frame clearances, the smallest height-towidth ratio, and the highest largest inter-story drift indexas a percentage of component height. NOTE 3: Consult applicable building codes. FEMA Publication P-750P NEHRP Recommended Seismic Provisions for New Buildings and Other Structures provides guidance for the specifier in determining an appropriate test plan. 6.0 TEST SPECIMENS 6.1 Unless otherwise specified, fallout tests shall be conducted on test specimens that simulate as closely as possible the components of the overall exterior wall system being evaluated. If a test specimen includes more than one glazed panel in width, in order to simulate the boundary support conditions of the designated test panel, overall project exterior wall system, then said test panel must be clearly labeled as such prior to conducting each crescendo test. Crescendo tests shall be conducted on three individual test specimens according to Section Project-specific wall panels or assemblies too large to be practically tested shall be evaluated by testing representative specimens of smaller size, as approved by the building engineer of record and code authority having jurisdiction, in consultation with the manufacturer and test agency. 6.2 Mounting conditions for each test specimen panel shall replicate the support conditions for the full-size exterior wall system assembly. Typical window, window wall, storefront and curtain wallexterior wall system test specimen mounting configurations are shown in Figure 1. For windows, window wall, storefront and strip windowexterior wall systems designed to span between slabs, the test specimen shall be mounted between (like an infill wall) and anchored to the sliding steel tubes utilizing actual head and sill detail conditions. For curtain wall tests, the specimen shall be mounted to the outside faces of the top and bottom sliding steel tubes. As depicted in Figure 23, the outside edges of the glass-holding horizontal members shall align with the inside edges of the sliding steel tubes. The vertical mullions of the curtain wall system test AAMA XX, Draft #5, Dated 9/7/2017 Page 5

8 specimen shall run beyond the outside edge of the glass-holding horizontal member by no more than 200 mm (8 in). Figure 2 3 represents a typical curtain wall mullion anchor detail. The Test Agency shall employ a mullion anchor detail during crescendo testing that replicates the actual mullion support conditions of the exterior wall system being tested. If actual, project-specific mullion anchorage details are not available, the test specimen shall be anchored as shown in Figure 23.. NOTE 4: While AAMA 501.6, as well as equations governing Δfallout in ASCE 7,-10 Section , are based on frame racking only, actual movement accommodation in exterior wall systems often results from other factors including, but not limited to, whole-unit tipping and/or lateral translation,, play in connection and anchors, etc., Alternate detailed engineering analysis may take some or all of these factors into account.use of project specific mullion anchors can allow for these other factors to be accommodated for during the testing. 6.3 For exterior wall systems comprised of individual windows or punched openings, the test specimen shall consist of three individual units. For the case of individual units, it is permissible to install all three units together in the test apparatus (assuming the actuator capacity is not exceeded at fallout) and test them simultaneously, or install each unit in the test apparatus individually, and test them one at a time. For products that are not individual windows or punched openings such as curtain walls or store fronts, the three specimens shall be installed together as a system and tested simultaneously. Where it is impractical to test three mulled units together it is permissible to test single units provided the adjacent boundary conditions are incorporated. For a unitized system, the effects of indexing clips (or any other system component) in the horizontal stack joint, which might induce a tipping or rocking behavior, must be accounted for otherwise pure sliding (translation) would occur at the location of the horizontal stack joint during the testing which is not representative of what would occur at the installed condition on the actual structure. AAMA XX, Draft #5, Dated 9/7/2017 Page 6

9 Curtainwall Movable chamber support Test specimens (n= 3) Window Wall and Punched Opening Windows Movable chamber support Test specimens (n=3) FIGURE 1: Proposed Test Configurations 7.0 TEST PROCEDURES 7.1 Crescendo tests, similar in concept and configuration to the multiple step test described in ATC-24 (1992), shall consist of a concatenated series of ramp up intervals and constant amplitude intervals. As depicted in Figure 34, inplane (horizontal) racking displacement steps between constant amplitude intervals shall be 6 mm (0.25 in). Ramp up intervals and constant amplitude intervals shall consist of four sinusoidal cycles each. Crescendo tests shall be performed at a frequency of /-0.0 Hz for total applied racking displacements (drift amplitudes) of ± 75 mm (± 3 inches) or less, and /-0.0 Hz for total applied racking displacements (drift amplitudes) greater than ± 75 mm (± 3 inches). The displacement shall be measured at the sliding steel tube with a measuring system shall be accurate to within ± 2 mm (± 1/ inches). One option for the location of the displacement measurement is shown in Figure Each crescendo test shall be run continuously until completion. Each crescendo test shall proceed until the first of the following conditions exists: (1) glass fallout, as defined in Section 6.3,7.3 occurs; (2) the inter-story drift index overas percentage of the height of the glass wall panel is at least 0.10 (10%); or (3) a dynamic racking displacement of ± 150 mm (± 6 inches) is applied to the test specimen. 7.3 Three identical test specimens of each glass panel configuration in the fallout test plan shall be subjected to the crescendo test. The dynamic racking amplitude associated with glass fallout, fallout, shall be measured and recorded during each crescendo test. The lowest fallout value measured during the three crescendo tests shall be the controlling AAMA XX, Draft #5, Dated 9/7/2017 Page 7

10 value reported for that set of specimens. Measurement of fallout shall be accomplished either by synchronized videotaping of the crescendo test or by another measurement technique approved by the specifier. Glass fallout is considered to have occurred when an individual glass fragment larger than 650 mm 2 (1.0 in 2 ) falls in any direction from the test panel glazed opening. If no glass fallout occurs by the end of the crescendo test, fallout for that specimen shall be reported as being greater than the maximum drift amplitude in mm (in) imposed on the test specimen during the crescendo test. 7.4 Although the focus of this test method is on glass fallout, the dynamic racking amplitude associated with fallout of other major exterior wall system components (e.g. stone or aluminum panels, trim, sunshades, etc.) shall also be noted and recorded during each crescendo test for information purposes. This information is particularly relevant if component fallout occurs before glass fallout during a given crescendo test. 7.5 Optional cracking Test The dynamic racking amplitude associated with initial glass cracking, cracking, may also be recorded as an option during each crescendo test. ( fallout is a life safety limit state of glass panels during seismic movements, while cracking is a serviceability limit state of glass panels during seismic movements. Life safety considerations form the primary basis for current model building code provisions. A cracked glass panel would require replacement, so it would no longer be serviceable. However, a cracked glass panel could also present a longer-term life safety hazard if glass fallout were to occur before a replacement glass unit is actually installed.) If cracking values are measured, results from all three individual crescendo tests shall be reported, but the lowest cracking value measured during the three crescendo tests shall be the controlling value reported for that set of specimens. If no glass cracking occurs by the end of the crescendo test, cracking for that specimen shall be reported as being greater than the maximum drift amplitude in mm (in) imposed on the test specimen during the crescendo test. 8.0 APPARATUS 8.1 A laboratory facility that has already been developed and utilized to perform dynamic racking crescendo tests is shown in Figure 12; this test facility is described in greater detail by Behr and Belarbi (1996). A schematic diagram of the stroke control and data acquisition system for the dynamic racking test facility is shown in Figure 54. Figures 21 and 54 are not included in this test method with the intention of prescribing the apparatus to be used for conducting the fallout tests. In fact, some of the features in Figures 1 2 and 4 (e.g., load cell measurements) are beyond the basic requirements of the crescendo test described in this test method. Figures 1 2 and 54 are included in this document primarily for informational purposes. 8.2 The test apparatus shall include a means of recording and printing a hard copy of a displacement versus time history for each crescendo test performed. See Figure 4 for recommended placement of displacement measurement devices. 8.3 The Test Agency may use an alternative apparatus to perform the dynamic racking crescendo test described in this test method. Any suitable test apparatus approved by AAMA during the laboratory accreditation process is permitted for use in performing fallout or optional cracking tests. AAMA XX, Draft #5, Dated 9/7/2017 Page 8

11 9.0 SAFETY PRECAUTIONS 9.1 This test method could involve the use of potentially hazardous operations and equipment. This document does not purport to address all appropriate safety issues associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this recommended test method to establish appropriate safety precautions. 9.2 Proper precautions shall be taken to protect all test observers in the event of any failure PRODUCT QUALIFICATION 10.1 Successful tests of a particular exterior wall system assembly (i.e.,in which no glass fallout occurs at the required percentage of drift) of a particular wall system assembly shall qualifiesy other assemblies of the same type that contain smaller glass panels, provided the following are satisfied: 1. The components of the glazing system (i.e. setting blocks, side blocks, gaskets, silicone seals, etc.) remain functionally unchanged. 2. The width and height of the glass lites do not exceed the tested size. 3. The nominal edge clearances are greater than or equal to those of the tested unit. 4. The percentage of inter story drift is equal to or less than the tested unit. 5. The SSG bead contact width is equal to or larger than the tested unit. 6. The SSG bead thickness is equal to or greater than the tested unit. NOTE 5: The potential effects of actual vs. tested glass lite aspect ratio on delta fallout are not addressed in this document. Changes in glass lite aspect ratio should be reviewed by the design engineer and building authority on a case-by-case basis. the anchorage of thefunctional components of the glazing system (setting blocks, side blocks, gaskets, silicone seals, etc.) remains unchanged. Smaller units shall qualify, provided that both the width and height do not exceed the tested size, the edge clearances are not reduced, and the specified inter-story drift indexas a decimal or percentage of floor height (i.e., the drift indexas required for the particular project) is equal to or less than the tested unit Successful tests of a particular exterior wall system assembly containing laminated glass (i.e.,in which no glass fallout occurs at the required percentage of drift) of a particular wall system assembly containing laminated glass qualifiesshall qualify other assemblies containing laminated glass, provided: the 1. All of the items in Section 10.1 are satisfied. 2. Inter-layer is equal to or greater in thickness. 3. Interlayer type remains unchanged. interlayer is equal to or greater in thickness, the glass type, thickness, heat treatment and anchorage of the glazing remains unchanged, the edge clearances are not reduced, and the specified inter-story drift indexas decimal or percentage of floor height is equal to or less than that required for the tested unit. AAMA XX, Draft #5, Dated 9/7/2017 Page 9

12 10.3 Successful tests of a particular wall assembly (i.e.,in which no glass fallout occurs at the required percentage of drift) of a particular wall assembly shall qualifyqualifies other assemblies with the same glazing type that are coated, tinted, heat absorbing, reflective, or aesthetically modified, provided the. Tthe requirements of Sections and, and 910.2, are satisfied. In addition, the following conditions apply: 1. Testing of heat-strengthened or fully tempered does not qualify annealed glass, or vice-versa. Testing of one treatment does not qualify. Testing annealed insulating glass qualifies heat-strengthened insulating glass but not vice versa. Neither qualifies fully tempered or chemically strengthened insulating glass or vice versa. 2. Non-laminated glazing qualifies laminated glazing of the same treatment with the same or greater single glass ply thickness Successful tests of a particular wall assembly that contains construction to improve thermal efficiency of the frame or sash (i.e.,in which no glass fallout occurs at the required percentage of drift) of a particular wall assembly that contains construction to improve thermal efficiency of the frame or sash shall qualifyqualifies other assemblies that do not contain construction to improve thermal efficiency and vice versa, provided the system otherwise remains unchanged and the requirements of Sections 910.1, and and 10.3 are satisfied Successful tests of a particular wall assembly in a standard frame qualifies deeper or shallower frame variations, or aesthetic variations with the same glazing system for movement in the plane of the glass. NOTE 6: The positive and/or negative effects of some changes to the wall assembly relative to drift capacity are more difficult to determine than those addressed in Sections 10.1 through Some of the changes to be considered by the specifying authority include: 1. Fully racked wall assembliesy s vs wall assemblies that exhibit a combination of sliding, rocking and then racking behavior. In this context, sliding is referring to horizontal translation; rocking refers to tipping of the entire framed unit; racking is defined in the AAMA glossary and (AG-13) 2. Whether or not a four-sided SSG wall assembly will or will not qualify a two-sided SSG wall assembly TEST REPORT 11.1 Three specimens of each glass panel lite configuration selected shall be subjected to the crescendo test. Results from all three individual crescendo tests shall be reported, but the lowest fallout value measured during the three crescendo tests shall be the controlling value reported as fallout for that set of specimens The displacement versus time record for each crescendo test shall be included in the test report to document the dynamic displacements actually imposed on each test specimen. The dynamic drifts associated with fallout (required) and cracking (optional) for all specimens of each test panel configuration shall be reported. Test results shall be reported in terms of both drift magnitudes in mm (in) and inter-story drift indices expressed as either decimals or percentages. AAMA XX, Draft #5, Dated 9/7/2017 Page 10

13 11.3 A clear sketch (or photograph) and a written description of glass fallout (required) and glass cracking (optional) shall be included in the test report for each test specimen.in terms of seismic life safety, tthe lowest fallout value measured during the entire approved test plan shall govern the glass fallout resistance of the prototype exterior wall system under consideration. The test report shall also make specific reference to any non-glass fallout event observed during any crescendo test, because such fallout events could also impose risks to life safety during an earthquake The test report shall also include: The name and address of the Test Agency, location of test site, date when test was completed, and date of issuance of report Identification and description of the specimen(s): manufacturer; source of supply; dimensions; model number; type; materials of construction; and any other pertinent information Glass thickness, type,heat treatment, coating and method of glazing. Type of interlayer employed in laminated glass units. Type of gasket material and structural silicone bead size when used. Dimensions of edge bite and clearances Type, materials of construction and locations of any anchoring systems and devices A ddrawings or photographs of the test facility and the exterior wall system test specimen indicating location of measuring devices and movement devices Additional observations made by Test Agency personnel during testing that could aid the specifier in evaluating system performance A statement that tests were performed in accordance with the AAMA- recommended test method REFERENCED DOCUMENTS RELOCATED TO SECTION References to the standards listed below shall be to the edition indicated. Any undated reference to a code or standard appearing in the requirements of this standard shall be interpreted as to referring to the latest edition of that code or standard American Architectural Manufacturers Association (AAMA) AAMA Recommended Static Test Method for Evaluating Curtain Wall and Storefront Systems Subjected to Seismic and Wind Induced Interstory Drifts, American Architectural Manufacturers Association, Schaumburg, Illinois. AAMA CW-DG-1-96 Aluminum Curtain Wall Design Guide Manual, American Architectural Manufacturers Association, Schaumburg, Illinois. AAMA XX, Draft #5, Dated 9/7/2017 Page 11

14 11.3 ASTM International (ASTM) ASTM E Standard Practice for Static Load Test for Shear Resistance of Framed Walls for Buildings, Annual Book of ASTM Standards, American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Additional Resources ATC-24, 1992 Guidelines for Cyclic Testing of Components of Steel Structures, Applied Technology Council, Redwood City, California, p. 11. Behr, R.A., Belarbi, A. and Culp, J.H., 1995, Dynamic Racking Tests of Curtain Wall Glass Elements with In-plane and Out-of-plane Motions, Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, Vol. 24, No. 1, pp Behr, R.A. and Belarbi, A., 1996, Seismic Test Methods for Architectural Glazing Systems, Earthquake Spectra, Vol. 12, No. 1, February 1996, pp NEHRP Recommended Provisions for Seismic Regulations for New Buildings and Other Structures, Part 1 Provisions, 2000, BSSC (Building Seismic Safety Council), Washington, D.C., Issued by the Federal Emergency Management Agency. NEHRP Recommended Provisions for Seismic Regulations for New Buildings and Other Structures, Part 2 Commentary, 2000, BSSC (Building Seismic Safety Council), Washington, D.C., Issued by the Federal Emergency Management Agency. Thurston, S.J. and King, A.B., 1992, Two-Directional Cyclic Racking of Corner Curtain Wall Glazing, BRANZ Study Report No. SR44, Building Research Association of New Zealand, Judgeford, New Zealand, p. 11, p. 13. Wright, P.D., 1989, The Development of a Procedure and Rig for Testing the Racking Resistance of Curtain Wall Glazing, BRANZ Study Report No. SR17, Building Research Association of New Zealand, Judgeford, New Zealand, p. 7, p. 13. AAMA XX, Draft #5, Dated 9/7/2017 Page 12

15 FIGURE 12: Dynamic Racking Test Facility at the Building Envelope Research Laboratory, Department of Architectural Engineering, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA. AAMA XX, Draft #5, Dated 9/7/2017 Page 13

16 FIGURE 23: Typical Curtain Wall Mullion Anchor Detail at Top and Bottom Sliding Steel Tubes of Dynamic Racking Test Facility AAMA XX, Draft #5, Dated 9/7/2017 Page 14

17 Ramp Up Interval Constant Amplitude Interval Drift Amplitude (mm) Time (sec) Drift Amplitude (in.) (a) First 30 Seconds of Crescendo Test / -0.0 Hz / -0.0 Hz Drift Amplitude (mm) Time (sec) Drift Amplitude (in.) (b) Full Crescendo Test FIGURE 34: Schematic of Displacement Time History for Dynamic Crescendo Test AAMA XX, Draft #5, Dated 9/7/2017 Page 15

18 PC RS 232C Interface Digital Oscilloscope Load Y Disp. X Controller Function Generator Connecting Pin Load Cell Controller Console Hydraulic Actuator Ram U - Joint Load Cell Signal Conditioning LVDT Signal Conditioning Servovalve Sliding Steel Tube Links Steel Plate Mounted to Reaction Frame Displacement Transducer (LVDT) FIGURE 45: Control and Data Acquisition System for Dynamic Racking Test Facility at the Building Envelope Research Laboratory, Department of Architectural Engineering, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA. AAMA XX, Draft #5, Dated 9/7/2017 Page 16