Residual Drift Response of SMRFs and BRB Frames in Steel Buildings Designed according to ASCE 7-05
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A recent study has shown that residual drifts after earthquakes that are greater than 0.5% in buildings may represent a complete loss of the structure from an economic perspective. To study the comparative residual drift response of special moment-resisting frames (SMRFs) and buckling-restrained braced (BRB) frames, buildings between 2 and 12 stories in height are designed according to ASCE 7-05 and investigated numerically. This investigation includes pushover analyses as well as two-dimensional nonlinear time-history analyses for two ground motion hazard levels. The two systems show similar peak drifts and drift concentration factors. The BRB frames experience larger residual drifts than the SMRFs; however, the scatter in the residual drift results is large. Expressions are proposed to estimate the residual drifts of these systems as a function of the expected peak drifts, the initial recoverable elastic drift, and the drift concentration factor of each system. When subjected to a second identical earthquake, both framing systems experienced larger-than-expected drifts when an initial drift greater than 0.5% was present.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".