MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2785621596 · doi:10.22215/etd/2016-11391

The Size Effect and Strain Effect in Reinforced Masonry

2016· dissertation· en· W2785621596 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Salah R. Sarhat

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMasonry and Concrete Structural Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMasonryStructural engineeringBrittlenessShear (geology)Geotechnical engineeringShear stressMaterials scienceEngineeringGeologyComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The research described in this thesis focuses on improving our understanding of the behaviour of reinforced concrete masonry subjected to shear. All shear design methods in current masonry building codes are empirically based, and have been shown to produce widely varying predictions of shear strengths of masonry walls, beams and columns. Furthermore, the research community acknowledges that there is little to no consensus on the exact mechanisms of shear transfer in masonry elements, thereby slowing the replacement of empirical design expressions with more rational approaches. Given that shear failures can be brittle and sudden, with little to no warning of impending failure; experimental research focusing on these two issues is of primary importance. An extensive experimental program consisting load-testing fifteen large-scale reinforced masonry beams is presented in this thesis. The results definitively show that principles that govern the shear design of reinforced concrete beams in Canada can be applied to reinforced masonry beams. Various phenomena that have been observed in reinforced concrete subjected to shear were also observed in these tests, includes “the size effect” and “the strain effect”. It is shown that design codes that do not account for these effects exhibit higher variability and in the case of size effect, may produce unsafe designs. Detailed instrumentation of the test specimens showed that aggregate interlock is the major mechanism of shear transfer in masonry beams, and as such this mechanism can explain much of the observed experimental behaviour. The size effect, wherein the failure shear stress decreases as the effective depth increases, can be explained by the reduced aggregate interlock capacity. Likewise, the strain effect, wherein the failure shear stress decrease as longitudinal strains increase, can be explained based on reduced aggregate interlock. It is also found that stirrups and longitudinal reinforcement distributed over the height of the beam have highly beneficial effects on shear behaviour of reinforced masonry. The test results of this research were used to justify the use of the CSA A23.3 as a base to revise the shear provisions in of CSA S304-2014 masonry code.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.949
Threshold uncertainty score0.579

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.002
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.196 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMasonry and Concrete Structural AnalysisFrench-language works237,207