Numerical Study of Alternative Seismic-Resisting Systems for CLT Buildings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Changes to building codes that enable use of materials such as cross-laminated timber (CLT) in mid- and high-rise construction are facilitating sustainable urban development in various parts of the world. Keys to this are the transition to multi-performance-based design approaches along with fewer limitations on heights or the number of storeys in superstructures constructed from combustible materials. Architects and engineers have increased freedom to apply new design and construction concepts and methods, as well as to combine timber with other structural materials. They also have started to develop wall arrangements that optimise interior space layouts and take advantage of the unique characteristics of CLT. This paper discusses the seismic response of multi-story buildings braced with a CLT core and perimeter shear walls anchored to foundations and floor platforms using modern high-capacity angle brackets and hold-downs, or X-Rad connectors. Linear dynamic finite element (FE) models of seismic responses of superstructures of various heights are presented, based on experimentally determined characteristics of wall anchor connections. Particular attention is given to fundamental vibration periods, base shear and uplift forces on walls, as well as inter-story drift. Discussion of FE model results focuses on structural engineering implications and advantages of using CLT to create shear walls, with emphasis on how choice of wall anchoring connections impacts the possible number of storeys and configurations of superstructures. Employing CLT shear walls with X-Rad or other types of high capacity anchoring connections makes possible the creation of building superstructures having eight and potentially more storeys even in high seismicity regions. However, it is important to emphasise that proper selection of suitable arrangements of shear walls for CLT buildings depends on accurate representation of the semi-rigid behaviors of anchoring connections. The linear dynamic analyses presented here demonstrates the need during engineering seismic design practices to avoid use of FE or other design models which do not explicitly incorporate connection flexibilities while estimating parameters like fundamental periods, base shear and uplift forces, as well as inter-story drift.
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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".