Fundamental periods of steel eccentrically braced frames
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary This paper describes formulation of a hand method that can be used to estimate the computed fundamental periods of vibration of building structures in general and steel eccentrically braced frames (EBFs) in particular. The developed method uses the Rayleigh's method as a basis and utilizes the roof drift ratio (RDR) under seismic forces as a parameter. To obtain RDR, more than 4000 EBFs were designed by considering the seismic hazard, number of stories, braced bay width and link length to bay width ratio as prime variables. A model was developed to estimate RDR, which depends on the rigid plastic deformation mechanism for a typical EBF. The method was verified using design data produced as a part of this work as well as data published in literature. The verifications indicate that the proposed formulation is capable of providing acceptable estimates of the computed period. When compared with existing empirical period–height relationships, the proposed formulation offers closer estimates with reduced scatter. The method was further refined to derive new period–height relationships for two different seismicity regions. The accuracy of the relationship for high seismic regions was verified using measured periods of EBF buildings. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".