Effects of in-plane loading on the out-of-plane stability of slender reinforced concrete masonry shear walls
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This chapter presents the experimental results of a research program that investigates the factors affecting the out-of-plane stability of slender Reinforced Masonry Shear Walls (RMSW) subjected to in-plane reversed cyclic loading, and the suitability of height-to-thickness (h/t) limits as a sole criterion for wall stability. The National Building Code of Canada prescribes different ductility-related force modification factors, Rd, for the design of masonry walls, which are based on the expected level of seismic performance and range from 1.0 for "Unreinforced Masonry Shear Walls" to 3.0 for "Ductile Shear Walls." All vertical reinforcing bars were continuous over the wall height, without the use of lap splices, and were anchored in reinforced concrete footings. The chapter focuses on the second phase of the experimental research program, which includes the testing of 8 full-scale RMSW specimens of varying h/t and height-to-length ratios, vertical and horizontal reinforcement content and detailing, applied axial stress, and geometric plan layout.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".