Evaluation of Wind-Induced Torsional Loads on Buildings by North American and European Codes and Standards
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
The common characteristics of wind-induced loads on building envelopes always vary in temporal and spatial dimensions. The variation of local wind pressures on building claddings and the total effective wind forces (base shear/overturning moment) on the main structural building systems have been investigated in the past few decades. However, very limited studies examined wind-induced torsional loads on the main resisting structural systems of buildings. This paper reviews these past studies and proceeds with a comparison of torsion provisions in three national wind loading standards, namely the American Society of Civil Engineers standard (ASCE/SEI 7-10), the National Building Code of Canada (NBCC 2010), and the European code (European 2004). Three low buildings located in an open terrain, in addition to three tall buildings located in suburban terrain were considered for this comparison. The low and tall building dimensions were selected to cover three different aspect ratios (length/width) varying from 1 to 3. The results demonstrated significant discrepancies among the provisions of these wind standards in evaluating torsional wind loads on buildings.
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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 it