Analysis of Steel Plate Shear Walls Using the Modified Strip Model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Unstiffened steel plate shear walls are an effective and economical method of resisting lateral forces on structures due to wind and earthquakes. Structural engineers require the ability to assess the inelastic structural response of steel plate shear walls using conventional analysis software that is commonly available and is relatively simple and expeditious to use. The strip model, a widely accepted analytical tool for steel plate shear wall analysis, is refined based on phenomena observed during loading of steel plate shear walls in the laboratory. Since the original strip model was proposed as an elastic analysis tool, these refinements are made primarily to achieve an accurate representation of yielding and eventual deterioration of the wall, although moderate improvements in initial stiffness predictions are also made. In assessing each of the proposed refinements, modeling efficiency is evaluated against the accuracy of the solution. A parametric study using the modified strip model examines the effect of varying the angle of inclination of the tension strips on the predicted inelastic behavior of the model. Notably, it was found that the ultimate capacities of steel plate shear wall models with a wide variety of configurations vary little with the variation of the inclination of the strips.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".