Effect of Beam-Column Connection Fixity on Collapse Performance of a Six-Storey Special Concentrically Braced Frame
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Concentrically braced frames are one of the most common seismic force resisting systems because of their high strength and stiffness. In current practice, the gusset plates that connect the brace to the adjacent beams and columns can increase the strength and stiffness of the connection significantly. This strength and stiffness can provide a reserve of lateral force resisting capacity during a large earthquake, which may play a role in the seismic collapse behaviour of the braced frame. An alternative connection has recently been proposed as a means of ensuring that brace buckling occurs only in-plane, that no field welding is required, and that all damage is confined to a replaceable brace module. However, the proposed connection does not include a gusset plate that can provide a similar stiffness and reserve capacity. In order to investigate the potential influence of the range of possible beam-column-gusset plate designs, this paper assesses the effect of the fixity of these connections on the behavior of a six-storey special concentrically braced frame. Nonlinear dynamic analyses have been conducted to determine the seismic performance of the frame with this connection modelled using three different assumptions (pinned, shear tab and fixed), and the collapse risk is assessed using the FEMA P695 methodology. The results show that when the gravity framing is not modelled, the fixity of the beam-column connections is important in avoiding the formation of a soft storey under extreme earthquakes, thereby reducing the probability of collapse of the building.
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) | 0.001 | 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".