Shear strength dataset of hollow concrete block masonry with different mortar bedding
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Masonry is a construction material composed of units (blocks or bricks) joined with mortar. It is one of the most widely used materials in construction resisting both vertical and horizontal forces in single and multi-family housing buildings. A correct union between the units and the mortar (interface) is essential, as is determining the resistance from the applied loads. There is a divergence in how the mortar is bedded in the construction of masonry walls. In some countries, such as Canada and Australia, regulations require that the mortar be placed in face shell bedding when hollow blocks are used. However, in countries like Mexico, regulations establish that it be placed in the net area, and construction practices often differ. Much research has been conducted to study the compressive behavior of mortar bedding in masonry of hollow concrete blocks. However, fewer studies have focused on shear behavior. This paper presents the dataset of experimental laboratory tests on wallettes built with hollow concrete blocks. Two methods of mortar bedding were employed: over the net area and the lateral face. The values obtained can be used to compare the shear strength in hollow concrete block masonry and the shear failure. Additionally, they can be useful for calibrating numerical models.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.006 |
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".