Seismic Performance of Mid-Rise Hybrid Light Wood Frame Buildings and Influence of Diaphragm Flexibility
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The structural response of mid-rise hybrid light wood frame buildings, incorporating portal frame and shear wall, under either cyclic load or earthquake action were investigated via finite element analysis. Based on the structural behaviour of the one- and five-storey hybrid buildings under cyclic loading, a method to estimate the ductility ratio, μ, and ductility-related force modification factor, Rd, for the light wood frame building containing two types of lateral load resisting systems exhibit different ductility characteristics was proposed. Four- and six-storey buildings with layouts that rely on shear wall only or a combination of shear wall and portal frame were designed using the Rd factors estimated from the proposed method. Natural frequency extraction and non-linear time history dynamic analyses were performed on these multi-storey hybrid buildings using a macro element model to represent the lateral resistant element in ABAQUS. The influence of horizontal diaphragm flexibility was considered in these analyses. The results show that the use of a Rd value higher than the lowest Rd factor of the two lateral load resisting systems suggested by the National Building Code of Canada may be justified.
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) | 0.000 | 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 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".