A Study on the Out-of-Plane Stability of Ductile Reinforced Masonry Shear Walls Subjected to In-Plane Reversed-Cyclic Loading
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Reinforced masonry shear walls (RMSWs), often constitute the principal seismic force resisting system of masonry structures in Canada and many other countries. During an earthquake, these walls are subjected to the combined effects of in-plane shear and overturning moments from seismic inertial forces, in addition to gravity loading. This combination of loading may precipitate out-of-plane instability of the wall end zones at higher levels of drift, when the end zone longitudinal reinforcement is subjected to cycles of high tensile strain. To prevent this instability, the Canadian masonry design standard (CSA S304-14) stipulates stringent wall height-to-thickness (h/t) limits for the seismic design of ductile RMSWs in Canada. This paper focuses on the second phase of an ongoing three-phase research program with the objective of evaluating these current h/t limits and establishing rational criteria for the out-of-plane stability of RMSWs. Five full scale RMSW specimens with ductile detailing and different height-to-length and h/t ratios, reinforcement volume and layout, axial stress, and loading setup have been tested to date using a lateral in-plane reversed cyclic loading protocol until the lateral load carrying capacity reached 60% of its peak. The results indicate that h/t limits alone are not sufficient for evaluating RMSW vulnerability to out-of-plane instability. A more robust and practical set of criteria may rather be established by setting limits on the axial tensile strain at the wall ends prior to occurrence of toe crushing.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".