Serviceability design factors for wind-sensitive structures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Wind-sensitive buildings can experience excessive vibrations that cause discomfort and interruption of the activities of the inhabitants of the buildings. To ensure the desired serviceability, codes, standards, and their commentaries have proposed perception curves that limit the expected (or mean) peak acceleration or standard deviation of the acceleration of the buildings. These perception curves are developed based on perceived vibration alone and do not consider the uncertainty in structural dynamic characteristics (i.e., natural frequency of vibration and ratio of damping) and loads such as the wind loading. Therefore, the annual probability that the perception curve is not exceeded for a building whose design is based on the perception curve is unknown. In this study, serviceability design factors are calibrated for selected targeted annual probability of perception levels by considering the uncertainty in the structural dynamic characteristics, wind characteristics, as well as in the human perception of motion. These serviceability design factors are to be used with the estimated mean peak acceleration caused by along-wind and cross-wind excitations given in the commentaries of the current National building code of Canada. The use of calibrated serviceability design factors for design checking is illustrated with a numerical example.
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".