Axial compression behavior of reinforced masonry walls and related revisions in the Australian masonry design standards
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The provisions related to design of reinforced masonry (RM) walls subjected to axial compression have recently been revised in the Australian Masonry Standards (AS 3700). Especially, the provisions pertaining to lateral ties have been relaxed, where if the vertical reinforcement bars are surrounded by a compacted grout annulus of at least two times the diameter of the bars, no lateral ties are specified. This paper summarizes the outcomes of a comprehensive research campaign carried out at Queensland University of Technology in collaboration with Concrete Masonry Association Australia that enabled these changes in the AS 3700. In total, 128 RM walls of varied heights, lateral tie arrangements, grout strengths and load eccentricities were tested under axial compression. Hollow concrete blocks with fully reinforced and grouted cores were used in the wall testing scheme. Lateral ties of 6 mm diameter were employed in different configurations with spacing varied from 200 mm to 800 mm along the height of the walls. The load eccentricity was varied from zero to one-third of the wall thickness. A finite element (FE) based numerical modelling method of RM walls under axial compression was also developed. The numerical modelling concept of RM walls was then validated through the established experimental data. The slenderness ratios of the experimentally tested walls varied from 4.2 to 12.6, while the RM walls with slenderness ratios of up to 42 were analyzed through the FE models. The grout strength, slenderness ratio and load eccentricity were shown to significantly influence the behaviour of RM walls under axial compression, whereas the lateral tie configurations at different spacing had insignificant effects on the axial compression behaviour of the RM. Finally, the results were used to investigate the reliability of relevant design provisions in AS 3700, Canadian (CSA S304.1-14) and American (TMS 402/602-16) masonry design 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 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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".