Novel panel system for concrete masonry walls
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Masonry is one of the oldest materials that humans use for construction. It is durable, as seen on ancient structures built thousands of years ago, yet still in excellent shape. Recently, masonry walls have struggled to be competitive among other construction materials such as precast concrete, tilt-up walls, timber, etc. This is mainly due to construction practices and the lack of a standardized modular masonry system that prevents offsite construction. In this paper, new construction methods for concrete masonry walls are proposed. These methods are based on building partially grouted masonry panels that can be built onsite or offsite, then transported and assembled on the site. The methods commonly use a restrained unbonded post-tensioned (UPT) threaded bar to join panels. A full-scale experimental program campaign at the University of Alberta (UOA) is currently undergoing to test the proposed methods. Numerical models were developed before the experimental investigation to assess the behaviour of such techniques under out-of-plane loading. Bare joints, connecting panels reinforcement, and grouting joints are the three types of panel connections proposed here. The influences of the magnitude of prestressing and lateral restraints stiffness are also studied. The results show that the proposed approaches are comparable to traditionally constructed walls with improved serviceability. Also, because of the relative ease of construction and improved post-cracking behaviour, connecting panel reinforcement is the preferred method. Whereas the increasing level of prestressing enhances service conditions but leads to premature failure. Also, lateral restraints with high stiffness, such as grout or steel, are essential to enhance post-cracking behaviour.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".