Seismic design and performance evaluation of steel-frame buildings designed using the 2005 <i>National building code of Canada</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The seismic design provisions in the current edition of the National building code of Canada significantly differ from those in the earlier version of the code . Although the code has moved from the earlier prescriptive provisions towards a more performance-based design, such design principles have not yet been fully implemented. In the present work, four ductile steel moment-resisting frame buildings with heights of 5, 10, 15, and 20 storeys, were designed for Vancouver using the newer code, and their performances were studied to determine the level of seismic protection implied in the code. Synthesized and scaled real ground motion records were used to evaluate the nonlinear dynamic response of these structures. Although the buildings achieved the collapse prevention performance objective of the code, variations in evaluated performance parameters for the different buildings were observed. Also, building performance was found to be affected by the presence of infill walls, as well as by the nature of selected ground motion records and the methods used to scale them to Vancouver uniform hazard spectra.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".