MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1868178162 · doi:10.1139/cjce-2013-0287

Basis for recommending an update of wind velocity pressures in Canadian design codes

2014· article· en· W1868178162 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Han Hong, T. G. Mara, Robert J. Morris, Sihan Li, W. Ye

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWind and Air Flow Studies
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsGumbel distributionWind speedMathematicsStatistical analysisStatisticsExtreme value theoryMeteorologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reference wind velocity pressures corresponding to specified return period wind speeds are provided in several Canadian design codes. A review of the two most recent editions of the National Building Code of Canada (NBCC) indicates that significant changes in some 50-year return period wind speeds, v AH - 50 , were introduced in the 2010 version of the NBCC-2010 compared to the previous NBCC-2005. The changes are due to analysis approaches, available wind records, and a re-examination of anemometer histories. To potentially improve the estimates of v AH - 50 , wind records in the Environment Canada HLY01 digital archive were processed. Two hundred and thirty-five meteorological stations are considered in the analysis, and height and exposure corrected annual maximum hourly-mean wind speed, V AH , are extracted. Statistical analysis and distribution fitting were carried out using the Gumbel distribution and generalized extreme value distribution and several fitting methods were employed. The results indicate that it is preferable to treat V AH as a Gumbel variate, and to carry out the fit using the generalized least-squares method. Wind speed contour maps for Canada are developed based on the estimated v AH -T for T equal to 50, 500, and 1000 years. A comparison of the maps of v AH-50 to those inferred from NBCC-2005 and NBCC-2010 shows that the developed map retains some of the smoothness of the wind speeds exhibited in NBCC-2010, while maintains the localized wind speed features presented in NBCC-2005. Results also show that the wind speed corresponding to the factored design wind load in NBCC-2010 is associated with a return period ranging from 200 to 5000 years, but for 90% of stations considered, the range narrows to 300 to 900 years.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.810
Threshold uncertainty score0.850

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.187 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations55
Published2014
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicWind and Air Flow StudiesFrench-language works237,207