A simplified homogeneous approach for non-linear analysis of masonry infill panels under in-plane loads
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper aims to create a unified model that effectively combines continuous 2-dimensional elements and discrete components to capture the nonlinear characteristics and failure mechanisms of solid and perforated masonry infill panels. Given that masonry infill behavior is primarily influenced by shear deformations, an equivalent model is developed by using multiple small square panels arranged diagonally and interconnected by two-component springs, encompassing axial and shear behavior at their intersections. For the sake of simplicity, the divided panels are assumed to behave elastically, with plasticity concentrated only in the axial component of the connector springs. Plastic behavior in the boundary elements was considered to involve both flexural and shear plastic hinges to provide an accurate estimation of the entire infill panel's behavior. To validate this approach, the simplified model is benchmarked against eight experimental masonry infill panels surrounded by steel or reinforced concrete frames and with or without openings. The results including global behavior and crack pattern were compared with available numerical predictions based on finite element method from the literature in addition to experimental outcomes. Ultimately, this comparison demonstrated that the homogeneous model could effectively predict the non-linear lateral behavior of the panels and accurately forecast crack patterns. Additionally, the use of unidirectional non-linear springs and the appropriate arrangement of elastic panels significantly reduced both pre-processing and analysis time.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".