Description
Authors:
Ece Erdogmus, College of Architecture, Art, and Construction, Clemson University, Clemson, SC
Jason Thompson, Coltivomae, Hamilton, VA
Bennett Banting, Canada Masonry Design Centre, Mississauga, ON, Canada
Helene Dutrisac, Department of National Defence, Ottawa, ON
Philippe Ledent, Masonry Institute of Michigan, Lansing, MI
Kevin Hughes, Tacoma Engineers, Inc., Barrie, ON, Canada
Bart Flisak, Crosier, Kilgour & Partners Ltd., Winnipeg, MB, Canada
TMS Journal Volume 42, December 31, 2024
Abstract
This work is the first one of the four companion papers associated with the Canada/US (CANUS) collaborative project: Harmonization of Canadian and American Masonry Structures Design Standards. This paper provides an overview of the key differences in reinforced concrete masonry design provisions between the two countries. The first part of the paper summarizes these differences in a discussion format, while the second part provides two design examples: a two-story mixed-use occupancy building and a multi-story residential building. Two locations are selected for high and low seismicity. While the critique of the building codes is out of the scope of this study, when appropriate, differences regarding the loading considerations from NBCC 2015 and ASCE 7-16 are highlighted. In some cases, the corresponding design checks align closely between the two countries’ design standards, while in other cases there are minor to significant differences. There are also instances where one of the standards is silent on a topic while the other addresses it comprehensively. In general, it is observed that TMS 402-16 allows a larger applicability of masonry design compared to CSA S304-14 due to the compounding effect of lower trust in masonry’s material strength and stricter considerations in design equations.
Keywords: Reinforced masonry design, masonry codes, compressive strength of masonry, TMS 402-16, CSA S304-14
