Assessment of the effect of non-structural walls on the dynamic properties and engineering demand parameters of a case study building
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
When an earthquake occurs, most international design approaches ignore the contribution of non-structural components (NSCs) to the building dynamic properties. This thesis evaluates the effects of the architectural components, namely curtain walls, and masonry walls, on the mode shapes, fundamental periods, damping ratios, and lateral stiffness of a case study building as well as the engineering demand parameters in terms of inter-story drifts and peak floor accelerations under the effect of selected and scaled earthquake records matching Montreal’s uniform hazard spectrum with a return period of 2500 years. \n \nFirst, ambient vibration measurements (AVMs) were conducted on the bare frame composed of the structural components. Then, another series of AVMs were conducted on the full frame when the NSWs were added to the structure. Modal parameters (natural frequencies, mode shapes and damping ratios) were extracted using the Stochastic Subspace Identification (SSI) implemented in the software ARTeMIS®. The modal parameters of the MDE were obtained for the first mode only at the bare frame stage due to lack of sufficient records, and for the first three modes of the full frame stage. Moreover, the floor acceleration amplifications (FAA) were computed for the roof at bare frame stage, and all floors at full frame stage. \n \nTwo linear-finite element models of the building at both construction stages were developed in the software ETABS® (CSI, 2017) and calibrated according to the AVMs results. Only the mass of the other NSCs and building content was considered in the analysis. \n \nIt was found that the building fundamental period decreased by -12.4% when the NSWs were added. The mode shapes remained the same at both stages of construction due to the presence of masonry walls only on the ground floor. Damping has been increased from +1.98% (bare frame) to +3.03% (full frame). Moreover, it was observed that NSWs contributed to the reduction of inter-story drifts at all floors in both directions (from -20.5% to -41.6% in the longitudinal direction, and from -25.8% to -67.6% in the transversal direction). In addition, the FAA of the full frame have been shown to be superior to those of the bare frame in all stages in the transversal direction. In the longitudinal direction, the FAA of the full frame are higher than those of the bare frame in the intermediate floors (2nd, and 3rd), and lower than those of the bare frame in the mezzanine, and the upper floors (4th, 5th, and roof). Indeed, it has been demonstrated that the FAA are not linear, and that they are underestimated by the NBC 2015 which may leads to an underestimation of the lateral seismic force of the NSCs by underestimating the amplification of the floor acceleration. \n \nFinally, to evaluate the effect of the NSWs separately on the stiffness of the building, two finite element models were taken: the full frame model, and another model without the NSC (masonry walls or curtain walls), then the effect of this NSW was quantified. It was also observed that masonry walls and curtain walls provided an additional stiffness of +20% and +5% respectively in the transversal direction. While in the longitudinal direction, the masonry walls brought an additional stiffness of +16%, and the curtain walls decreased the stiffness of -4% due to their disconnections from the slabs in the upper floors.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».