Performance-Based Capacity Design of Steel Plate Shear Walls. I: Development Principles
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This is Part I of two companion papers on performance-based capacity design of steel plate shear walls. Most previous research has been conducted with the primary aim of maximizing ductility and robustness under severe cyclic loading, without any explicit consideration of the costs of achieving this behavior. This has resulted in onerous capacity design rules in current codes and standards for achieving highly ductile systems, and has effectively discouraged their use in low and moderate seismic regions. These companion papers aim to provide a holistic and sound basis for capacity design to any of three explicit performance levels. In this paper, Part I, two target yield mechanisms associated with the two extreme performance levels (ductile and limited-ductility) are identified and justified, and the capacity design principles applicable to these performance levels are discussed. The limited-ductility mechanism departs from conventional treatment and is established based on finite element simulations and experimental observations. Two complementary new concepts for designing moderately ductile walls are also proposed and verified. Because design is an iterative process, modeling efficiencies for use with the performance-based approach are suggested and validated. Inconsistencies between current capacity design methods for evaluating the demands imposed by the infill plates on the boundary elements and the true infill plate behavior are identified and discussed.
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.
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) | 0.001 | 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 it