slickdeals
Structural
What is your standard detail when it comes to non load-bearing masonry around the building envelope transferring wind/seismic loads to the diaphragm.
In my old firm, for post-tensioned slabs, the detail involved sleeves through which reinforcing was passed through and grouted. IMO, this is not truly non load-bearing, but because this wall did not continue on through to the foundation, it acted as a "deep beam" for bending. Each slab (cantilever or not) picked up its share of this load. I don't believe we had any issues with this detail.
However, if the masonry did go through to the foundation, I am certain this would have picked up loads incrementally and possibly caused problems.
A proper detail would be to use a compressible filler in between, and maybe rebar in sleeves (not grouted) for shear transfer. However, with the gap, the rebar would be substantial (shear + bending).
Appreciate your inputs.
In my old firm, for post-tensioned slabs, the detail involved sleeves through which reinforcing was passed through and grouted. IMO, this is not truly non load-bearing, but because this wall did not continue on through to the foundation, it acted as a "deep beam" for bending. Each slab (cantilever or not) picked up its share of this load. I don't believe we had any issues with this detail.
However, if the masonry did go through to the foundation, I am certain this would have picked up loads incrementally and possibly caused problems.
A proper detail would be to use a compressible filler in between, and maybe rebar in sleeves (not grouted) for shear transfer. However, with the gap, the rebar would be substantial (shear + bending).
Appreciate your inputs.