Proposed Canadian code provisions for seismic design of elements of structures, nonstructural components, and equipment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Proposed code provisions for the seismic design of elements of structures, nonstructural components, and equipment are presented. In these provisions a new format is introduced which gives a consistent treatment for all elements and components, architectural, mechanical, and electrical. For the first time, soil effects are included in the provisions, which also seek to ensure that designers consider the interrelationship of the nonstructural components and differential displacements within the building structure. The proposed force equation is based on a uniform hazard spectrum approach with force modification factors. Specified force levels are based on data from instrumented buildings recorded during recent earthquakes. Updated requirements for connection design specify forces that are consistent with component design forces. New element and component categories are provided in an expanded table of elements of structures, nonstructural components, and equipment. To assess the impact of the proposed provisions on component design at various locations across the country, calculations are presented for typical multistorey buildings in a number of Canadian cities.Key words: seismic design, elements of structures, nonstructural mechanical electrical architectural components.
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 | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.027 | 0.009 |
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".