Seismic design and response of steel multi-tiered concentrically braced frames in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article investigates the seismic design and response of steel multi-tiered concentrically braced frames (MT-BFs) in which braces meet at columns between diaphragms. The seismic design provisions of CSA S16-14 are described and illustrated for three-tiered Type MD (moderately ductile) and five-tiered Type LD (limited ductile) braced frames. Analysis methods are proposed to evaluate the in-plane flexural demand on columns. The seismic response of the frames is examined through nonlinear response history analysis. As assumed in design, inelastic deformations tend to concentrate in one tier over the frame height, causing non-uniform drift demands and in-plane bending moments in the columns. CSA S16 provisions predicted well the frame in-plane flexural response and result in acceptable ductility demands on the braces. An extended seismic analysis and design approach that accounts for vertical distribution of brace tension yielding along the frame height is proposed for frames that exceed the limits prescribed in CSA S16.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".