1956
DOI: 10.1061/jsdeag.0000019
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Arching Action Theory of Masonry Walls

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
18
0

Year Published

1975
1975
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
5
4

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 102 publications
(28 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
18
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, experiments [13][14][15][16] showed that membrane forces appear in the wall due to deformation of the wall after cracking, thus proving that the arching action is a predominant resisting mechanism. McDowell et al (1956a,b) [11,12] were the first to propose calculation of out-of-plane capacity of masonry walls considering one-way arching action. Instead of flexural or tensile strengths which were used in preceding approaches, they incorporated compressive strength of masonry into their formulation.…”
Section: Summary Of Analytical Approaches Estimating Out-of-plane Capacitymentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…However, experiments [13][14][15][16] showed that membrane forces appear in the wall due to deformation of the wall after cracking, thus proving that the arching action is a predominant resisting mechanism. McDowell et al (1956a,b) [11,12] were the first to propose calculation of out-of-plane capacity of masonry walls considering one-way arching action. Instead of flexural or tensile strengths which were used in preceding approaches, they incorporated compressive strength of masonry into their formulation.…”
Section: Summary Of Analytical Approaches Estimating Out-of-plane Capacitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…On the other side, the performance of infilled frames under out-of-plane seismic loading component was the subject of significantly smaller number of experimental researches. In one of the first experimental investigations on out-of-plane behaviour of URM walls conducted by McDowell et al (1956a,b) [11,12], the important arching action or arching effect was discovered. Further experimental studies on out-of-plane response of masonry infills were carried out by Dawe and Seah (1989b) [13], Angel et al (1994) [14], Flanagan and Bennett (1999b) [15] and Di [16], among others.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The second approach is based on the observation that the arching effect develops in a wall provided that surrounding elements are able to resist thrust. In the one-way arching model, the collapse is associated to a three-hinge mechanism (Figure 1b), which is usually activated along the shorter dimension, and the collapse load depends on the masonry compressive strength and on the wall slenderness [28]. When the infill is restrained at four edges, a twoway arching action may develop, thus increasing the OOP strength [29,30].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It should be also observed that infills with moderate-to-low slenderness and well restrained at the sides, can develop significant resistance and displacement capacity because of the arching mechanism and two-way bending effect which develops under out-of-plane actions. Several studies addressed specifically out-of-plane resisting mechanism [1,4,5,7,[9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18], developing different formulations estimating OOP resistance to perform safety checks [1,[18][19][20][21][22][23][24]. Although starting from similar theoretical consideration, results provided by these models are often conflicting [24], giving the impression that some of them are more reliable in some cases and less in others.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%