Seismic Performance Assessment of Multitiered Steel Concentrically Braced Frames Designed in Accordance with the 2010 AISC Seismic Provisions
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
Multitiered steel concentrically braced frames (CBFs) are commonly used to provide lateral resistance for tall single-story commercial, performing arts, sports, and industrial buildings. The seismic response of these frames is studied in this paper. A set of seven special concentrically braced frames (SCBFs), ranging from 9 to 30 m tall with two to six tiers, located in a high seismic area was designed according to the 2010 AISC Seismic Provisions. Fundamental behavior of the two- and four-tiered frames was investigated using three-dimensional (3D) finite element models with shell elements, with particular focus on the buckling response of the columns. The seismic frame response and column stability were then studied more broadly for all frames using more computationally efficient 3D finite element models with fiber-based beam-column elements, which were validated against the shell element models. Multitiered CBFs designed according to current multistory CBF procedures are shown to develop drift concentration in a single tier and high in-plane column bending demand, which in some cases leads to flexural yielding and column instability. As potential solutions to this problem, alternate design strategies were studied and their seismic performance is also presented. Designing for higher seismic forces did not appreciably improve column stability, but use of fixed column bases or buckling-restrained braces provided improved distribution of drift over multiple tiers and reduced the occurrence of column instability. Unlike multistory braced frame seismic design, column flexural demands are more important in multitiered braced frames and must be considered in seismic design.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it