TOWARDS THE RECONCILIATION OF THE EMPIRICAL AND RATIONAL DESIGN PROVISIONS OF CSA S304-14
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Masonry structures in Canada are designed in accordance with CSA S304-14 which includes both empirical and rational design provisions. The two design methods result in inconsistent outcomes in certain cases. This thesis investigates one such case where the empirical design provisions for unreinforced, vertically spanning, non-loadbearing, exterior concrete block walls subject to wind load result in less conservative outcomes than the rational design provisions. This discrepancy of design outcomes can indicate either the inadequate levels of safety of the empirical design method or unnecessary conservatism of the rational design method. The goal of this study is to contribute to the reconciliation of the two design methods included in CSA S304-14 for the aforementioned case. \nA review of past experimental investigations suggests that parameters influencing the flexural tensile strength of walls include mortar type, support conditions, wall slenderness ratio, and the load application method. An experimental program was conducted to provide additional data in areas where test data was lacking: walls constructed using mortar cement mortar, walls with slenderness ratios equal and greater than 16, and walls with realistic support conditions. A database was compiled using test results from the past and the present experimental investigations, and was used to perform a reliability analysis for unreinforced concrete block walls subject to out-of-plane loading. The reliability analysis was conducted using a Monte Carlo simulation and the unfactored rational equation as the limit state function. Results were used to provide recommendations for the empirical provisions of CSA S304-14 assuming a minimum acceptable reliability index equal to 2.5 based on past investigations. \nWalls with slenderness ratios equal to or greater than 16 consistently resulted in reliability indices lower than 2.5. Walls with a slenderness ratio equal to 12 resulted in reliability indices lower than 2.5 when subjected to a 1 in 50 years wind pressures equal to 0.53 kPa and 0.29 kPa, respectively, for the minimum and maximum values of internal pressure. Potential correlation of the different included parameters may have influenced the results and, therefore, no changes to CSA S304-14 were proposed. It was, however, recommended that the standard include a commentary to inform users of the lack of quantitative evidence supporting the safety of unreinforced masonry walls subject to wind when designed according to the empirical provisions, in particular for increasing slenderness ratios and 1 in 50 years wind pressure.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».