Brick–mortar interface effects on masonry under compressionThis article is one of a selection of papers published in this Special Issue on Masonry.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Masonry component products are increasingly made industrially with reduced variation in mechanical properties. The joint is the only part of the masonry that is affected by manual action and so the load bearing capacity is not only determined by the quality of the bricks and mortar used but moreover by the way the masonry has been built and cured. As a result, it may be expected that the largest material variations are at the brick–mortar interfaces. This has been observed as irregular interface bonding with a bonded central area surrounded by fissures. As a consequence of the final shape of the joint, forces concentrate in the central part of the joint and strain variations occur near fissure tips which result in spalling of bricks in experiments. This paper demonstrates the need for detailed deformational measurements in the brick–mortar interface region. To overcome the limitations with traditional measuring instruments, a refined methodology based on the laser speckle technique is introduced in a companion paper [Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, 34(11), 1467 (2007)] by the authors of this paper.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".