Canada/US (CANUS) Comparison of Out-of-Plane Reinforced Masonry Wall Design Provisions

As part of a larger project jointly sponsored by the National Concrete Masonry Association (NCMA) Foundation, Canadian Concrete Masonry Producers Association (CCMPA), Canada Masonry Design Centre (CMDC) and Canadian Standards Association (CSA), a team of engineers and researchers from U.S. and Canada worked together to examine the key differences and similarities between the design provisions for reinforced masonry walls subject to out-of-plane (OOP) and axial loads. The scope was limited to the strength design provisions of TMS 402-16 and the limit state design provisions of CSA S304-14 masonry design standards. Several parametric studies were conducted to quantify the comparisons, as well as to identify possible limitations within each code. These studies explored factors that directly impact the calculation of combined flexural and axial capacity, wall stiffness, second-order moments, and shear capacity of the masonry walls subjected to OOP loading. Parameters considered include the compressive strength of the masonry assembly, wall geometry, as well as the size, strength and spacing of the steel reinforcement. In general, it was found that the Canadian provisions are more conservative than those in the U.S. The paper also provides a list of areas of further research or code revisions that should be considered in the future. It is the team’s goal to propose improvements to both codes as a result of this work.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
The Masonry Society Journal
Published
2024-12-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.70803/001c.136442
Primary Topic
Masonry and Concrete Structural Analysis
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Canada/US (CANUS) Comparison of Out-of-Plane Reinforced Masonry Wall Design Provisions

Carlos Cruz-Noguez, Bennett Banting, Clayton Pettit, Ece Erdogmus et al.
The Masonry Society Journal
Masonry and Concrete Structural Analysis
article

Canada/US (CANUS) Comparison of Out-of-Plane Reinforced Masonry Wall Design Provisions

Carlos Cruz-Noguez, Bennett Banting, Clayton Pettit, Ece Erdogmus, Bart Flisak, Jason Thompson, Richard M. Bennett, Şemsi Çoşkun, David Stubbs, R. L. Peterson, Heather Sustersic
article en

Abstract

As part of a larger project jointly sponsored by the National Concrete Masonry Association (NCMA) Foundation, Canadian Concrete Masonry Producers Association (CCMPA), Canada Masonry Design Centre (CMDC) and Canadian Standards Association (CSA), a team of engineers and researchers from U.S. and Canada worked together to examine the key differences and similarities between the design provisions for reinforced masonry walls subject to out-of-plane (OOP) and axial loads. The scope was limited to the strength design provisions of TMS 402-16 and the limit state design provisions of CSA S304-14 masonry design standards. Several parametric studies were conducted to quantify the comparisons, as well as to identify possible limitations within each code. These studies explored factors that directly impact the calculation of combined flexural and axial capacity, wall stiffness, second-order moments, and shear capacity of the masonry walls subjected to OOP loading. Parameters considered include the compressive strength of the masonry assembly, wall geometry, as well as the size, strength and spacing of the steel reinforcement. In general, it was found that the Canadian provisions are more conservative than those in the U.S. The paper also provides a list of areas of further research or code revisions that should be considered in the future. It is the team’s goal to propose improvements to both codes as a result of this work.

The Masonry Society JournalVol. 42(1)
Louisiana State University (US), University of Alberta (CA), Colby Community College (US), University of Tennessee at Knoxville (US), Clemson University (US)
Canada Masonry Design Centre
Openalex Percentile: Top 68%
Masonry and Concrete Structural Analysis
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.