Out‐of‐Plane Dynamic Stability of Unreinforced Masonry Walls in One‐Way Bending: Shake Table Testing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Given sufficient anchorage to the diaphragms, an unreinforced masonry (URM) wall subjected to out‐of‐plane inertial forces will likely develop a horizontal crack at an intermediate height about which the wall will rock as semirigid bodies. The effect of wall slenderness on out‐of‐plane stability has been demonstrated in past studies, but treatment of the effects of diaphragm flexibility and ground motion variability has been limited. This paper presents an experimental study examining the out‐of‐plane stability under seismic loading of URM walls connected to flexible diaphragms. Five full‐scale unreinforced solid clay brick wall specimens spanning one story were subjected to earthquake ground motions using a shake table. The top and bottom of the walls were independently connected to the shake table through coil springs, simulating the flexibility of diaphragms. Variables examined experimentally included diaphragm stiffness and wall height. Both the amount of rocking observed as well as the ground motion scale causing collapse varied significantly with changes in the diaphragm properties. The test results provided data used for validation of a rigid‐body rocking model, enabling an extensive parametric study on wall stability and the development of new assessment guidelines in a companion 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".