Accounting for residual deformation and simple approaches to their mitigation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent developments in performance-based seismic design and assessment approaches have emphasised the importance of properly assessing and limiting the residual (permanent) deformations, typically sustained by a structure after a seismic event, even when designed according to current code provisions. Recent investigations have led to a proposed Direct Displacement-Based Design (DDBD) approach which includes an explicit consideration of the expected residual deformations accounting for 2-dimensional and MDOF effects. Having estimated the possible residual deformations in a structure, it remains to implement specific design features to reduce them to an acceptable level. Previous studies have identified post-yield stiffness as being critical to residual deformation behaviour, therefore a series of simple approaches are proposed to increase this element and system parameter. These methods do not utilise re-centring post-tensioned technology. First, the effects of changes in material stress-strain behaviour and section design in the primary seismic-resisting system are considered, and then the design and introduction of a secondary elastic frame to act in parallel with the primary system is demonstrated. Using moment-curvature and non-linear time-history analyses, the proposed approaches are shown to be effective at achieving their intended goal of residual deformation reduction.
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 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".