Determination of seismic design forces by equivalent static load method
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the proposed 2005 edition of the National Building Code of Canada (NBCC), the seismic hazard will be represented by uniform hazard spectra corresponding to a 2% probability of being exceeded in 50 years. The seismic design base shear for use in an equivalent static load method of design will be obtained from the uniform hazard spectrum for the site corresponding to the first mode period of the building. Because this procedure ignores the effect of higher modes, the base shear so derived must be suitably adjusted. A procedure for deriving the base shear adjustment factors for different types of structural systems is described and the adjustment factor values proposed for the 2005 NBCC are presented. The adjusted base shear will be distributed across the height of the building in accordance with the provisions in the current version of the code. Since the code-specified distribution is primarily based on the first mode vibration shape, it leads to an overestimation of the overturning moments, which should therefore be suitably adjusted. Adjustment factors that must be applied to the overturning moments at the base and across the height are derived for different structural shapes, and the empirical values for use in the 2005 NBCC are presented.Key words: uniform hazard spectrum, seismic design base shear, equivalent static load procedure, higher mode effects, base shear adjustment factors, distribution of base shear, overturning moment adjustment factors.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.003 |
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".