Proposal of simplified design methods to evaluate second-order effects in tall reinforced masonry walls
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A previous experimental campaign has demonstrated the good behavior of tall rein-forced masonry (RM) walls, with vertically perforated clay units, when subjected to lateral actions. The samples tested represent typical construction systems of commercial and industrial single-story RM buildings provided with deformable roofs. \nHowever, to date, EN1996 does not have a consistent approach to check the second-order effects due to out-of-plane loads in such structures, providing requirements for RM walls which are too restrictive. \nThis paper firstly discusses some of the major results of a recent numerical parametric study which implements fiber FE models calibrated from the above tests, as the actual slenderness limits for RM walls, also on the basis of experimental evidences. Then, more rational simplified approaches than that provided in EN1996 for evaluating second-order effects in tall RM walls are proposed, starting from the design methods of the Model Column (MC) and the Nominal Curvature (NC) generally used for RC structures; details on how these general methods were adapted to be used for RM tall walls are given in the paper. Finally, their reliability is assessed with respect to the numerical results of the previous parametric study, as well as that of the Moment Magnifier (MM) method proposed by the American (TMS 402) and Canadian (CSA S304) standards.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".