MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4405468769 · doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2024.119507

Strength evaluation of early-age full-scale unreinforced masonry walls against out-of-plane loading using experimental and numerical studies

2024· article· en· W4405468769 sur OpenAlexafffund
Ali Abasi, Bennett Banting, Ayan Sadhu

Notice bibliographique

RevueEngineering Structures · 2024
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineEngineering
ThématiqueMasonry and Concrete Structural Analysis
Établissements canadiensWestern University
Organismes subventionnairesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Masonry Design CentreCanada Foundation for Innovation
Mots-clésUnreinforced masonry buildingStructural engineeringMasonryFull scaleMaterials scienceScale (ratio)Geotechnical engineeringEngineeringPhysics

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

There is a lack of understanding of the early-age (within the first seven days) strength properties of masonry. As a result, the design of temporary wind bracing of masonry during construction tends to error on the side of excess conservatism and consequently ends up being more costly and complex than what may otherwise be required. The consequences of failure of these bracing systems are catastrophic, yet there is a lack of research and definitive design guidance available for engineers who may seek to better optimize their design. This paper investigates the strength and behavior of early-age full-scale masonry walls subjected to out-of-plane loading through comprehensive experimental and numerical studies, aiming to fill the gaps in current masonry design codes and facilitate robust, accurate and cost-effective wind bracing of masonry during construction. Recognizing the vulnerability of early-age masonry to wind-induced out-of-plane forces, an innovative test setup was developed to evaluate cantilever and simply-supported masonry walls. A total of 60 full-scale walls were tested at various stages of curing prior to full 28-day strength. A novel setup, validated by different types of recorded data and digital image correlation analysis, was designed to capture the walls' behavior. Key findings indicate that the early-age walls showed minimal tensile strength until 24 hours and achieved ∼50 % and ∼73 % of their full strength within the first 24 and 72 hours, respectively. The relationships between tensile strength and curing time were found to be logarithmic. Regression models were developed for predictive purposes. Also, there is no meaningful difference between the tensile strength of simply supported walls and cantilever walls. The tensile strength of early-age walls was found to be significantly higher than that of axial tensile strength of masonry prisms and mortar cubes, especially during early ages when primary hydration had not fully occurred. Masonry that has reached its 28-day strength showed good agreement with specified flexural tensile strength in design codes, confirming the reliability of the test setup and the experimental results. A finite element model was employed to simulate the walls, showing good agreement with experimental results. The proposed predictive regression model also estimated properties for curing times not covered experimentally, providing insights for designing temporary bracing systems for early-age masonry, and highlighting the potential for improved safety and efficiency in construction practices. • This paper evaluates the early-age strength of full-scale masonry walls by conducting extensive numerical and experimental studies. • Early-age masonry walls reach ∼50 % of lateral strength at 24 hrs and ∼73 % at 72 hrs, with a logarithmic increase. • There is no significant difference in flexural tensile strength between early-age cantilever and simply supported walls. • The finite element model accurately predicts lateral strength and failure modes of early-age walls. • Findings suggest potential revisions to CSA-S304 for shear resistance and flexural tensile strength of cantilever walls. • Flexural tensile strength of masonry walls exceeds axial masonry assemblage tensile strength by 3.6 times and mortar cube tensile strength by 1.46 times, more notably at t < 24.

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 enseignants

Ni 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.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Simulation ou modélisation · Signal consensuel: Simulation ou modélisation
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,278
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,920

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,021
Tête enseignante GPT0,277
Écart entre enseignants0,255 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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 découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSimulation ou modélisation
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations2
Publié2024
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueEngineering StructuresMême sujetMasonry and Concrete Structural AnalysisTravaux en français237 207