Out-of-Plane Behavior of Slender Reinforced Masonry Shear Walls under In-Plane Loading: Experimental Investigation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents the results of a multiphase research program aimed at investigating the out-of-plane stability of slender reinforced masonry shear walls (RMSWs) under in-plane reversed-cyclic loading. The objective of this study was to evaluate the adequacy of the out-of-plane stability provisions specified in the Canadian masonry design standard, which are currently in the form of height-to-thickness (h/t) limits. For the second phase of the program, which is presented in this paper, the evaluation was carried out by experimental testing of five slender full-scale RMSW specimens with varying h/t and height-to-length aspect ratios, reinforcement ratio, detailing, and applied axial precompression stress level. The tests were conducted by applying a displacement-controlled loading protocol at the top of each specimen, without restraining the in-plane rotational degree of freedom, until the lateral load-carrying capacity of the specimen was reduced to 60% of its peak capacity. Detailed qualitative and quantitative test results are summarized in this paper. In addition, a discussion regarding key factors found to affect the out-of-plane stability of RMSWs is presented. Preliminary findings suggest that the current Canadian masonry design standard h/t limits may be potentially conservative if used alone to assess the out-of-plane stability of RMSWs.
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) | 0.001 | 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".