Experimental Study of Masonry-Infilled Steel Frames Subjected to Combined Axial and In-Plane Lateral Loading
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An experimental program was conducted to investigate some aspects of in-plane behaviour of masonry infilled steel frames. Eight concrete masonry infilled steel frames, consisting of three fully grouted and five partially grouted infills, were tested under combined lateral and axial loading. All specimens were constructed using one-third scale concrete masonry units. The in-plane lateral load was gradually increased at the frame top beam level until the failure of the specimen while an axial load was applied to the top beam and held constant. The parameters of the study included axial load, extent of grouting, opening, and aspect ratio of the infill. The experimental results were used, along with other test results from the literature, to evaluate the efficacy of stiffness and strength predictions by some theoretical methods with a focus on Canadian and American design codes. Cracking pattern, stiffness, failure mode, crack strength, and ultimate strength of the specimens were monitored and reported.\n\nPresence of axial load was found to increase the ultimate strength of the infilled frame but had no marked effect on its stiffness. Two specimens exhibited “splitting failure” due to axial load. Partially grouted specimens developed extensive diagonal cracking prior to failure whereas fully grouted specimens showed little or no cracking prior to failure. An increase in grouting increased the ultimate strength of the frame system but reduced its ductility. Presence of opening reduced the ultimate strength of the infilled frame and increased its ductility but its effect on the stiffness of the frame system was not significant. A review of current Canadian and American design codes showed that the Canadian code significantly overestimates the stiffness of infilled frames whereas the American code provides improved predictions for stiffness of these frame systems. Both design codes underestimate the strength of masonry infilled steel frames but grossly overestimate the strength of masonry infilled RC frames.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".