Floor response spectra for seismic design of operational and functional components of concrete buildings in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It has been observed during previous earthquakes that the damage to operational and functional components of buildings often result in more injuries, fatalities and property damage than those inflicted by structural damage. Operational and functional components of a building include architectural components, mechanical and electrical equipment, as well as building contents. A rational approach to designing these elements against seismic excitations involves the use of floor design spectra. The development of such design spectra for buildings in Canada constitutes the objective of the paper. This objective was achieved by conducting comprehensive analyses of selected reinforced concrete buildings, with different lateral force resisting systems and building heights, under code compatible earthquake records for an eastern and a western Canadian city. It was observed that the floor response was significantly amplified, especially for buildings with short periods. Generally, the higher floors showed higher amplifications with differences in spectra between the floors being more pronounced in low-rise buildings and shear wall buildings with short fundamental periods. The results provided a large volume of data to generate floor response spectra for the design of operational and functional components of buildings in Canada. The details of the approach and the design spectra are presented in the paper.
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 | 0.000 | 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".