Seismic Performance of Conventional Construction Braced Steel Frames Designed According to Canadian Seismic Provisions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents an ongoing research project on the seismic performance of concentrically braced steel frames of the Conventional Construction category designed according to Canadian seismic provisions. A preliminary test program performed on typical brace connections indicated that a governing bolt bearing failure mode can lead to ductile connection response. Nonlinear time history analyses were carried out for 4- and 8-storey structures to assess the force and deformation demand from earthquakes on brace connections. The building height, the location in Canada, and the site class were varied. The median brace axial forces obtained from the analyses were found to exceed the code design force level specified for non ductile brace connections, except for the buildings located on site Class C in Montreal. These structures however possessed increased overstrength due to building code provisions. The excessive force demand observed in the other structures is mainly attributed to the difference in damping levels assumed in analysis and design. For the 4-storey structures, the computed median inelastic connection deformation values are small enough to be accommodated by properly detailed connections exhibiting a bolt bearing failure mode. The 8-storey structures experienced larger deformations, in excess of the tested connection capacity, as well as marked demand concentrations over the building height.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".