MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3201119976 · doi:10.1002/tal.1895

Utilizing I‐shaped shear links as dampers to improve the behavior of concentrically braced frames

2021· article· en· W3201119976 on OpenAlexaff
Ahmad Jabbar Hussain Alshimmeri, Ali Ghamari, Hany El Naggar

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Structural Design of Tall and Special Buildings · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSeismic Performance and Analysis
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDamperStructural engineeringBraced frameFlangeBucklingDiagonalStiffnessBraceShear (geology)EngineeringMaterials scienceFrame (networking)MathematicsComposite materialMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary During the past few decades, concentrically braced frames (CBFs) have become a commonly used load‐resistant bearing system in steel structures, to overcome the post‐earthquake performance issues frequently associated with conventional seismic‐resisting structural systems. CBF systems have high lateral stiffness and lateral strength; however, they have low ductility and a low seismic energy dissipating capacity. Under seismic loading, the diagonal members of a CBF system are susceptible to buckling, causing hysteresis in the compression zone and severely reducing energy absorption. Although the use of steel dampers to enhance the behavior of CBF systems can prevent the buckling of CBF members and improve the hysteretic behavior of braces, their use imposes additional costs on structures. Therefore, in this paper, an I‐shaped steel damper with a shear yield mechanism is introduced which is economical, has a simple construction, and can be easily replaced after an earthquake. The proposed damper is evaluated numerically and parametrically. The results indicate that the proposed damper acts as a ductile fuse that prevents buckling of the diagonal members of a CBF system. It was found that both the web and flange plates contribute to the shear resistance, with the flange carrying approximately 15% of the shear force, as expressed in the equations presented. The overstrength obtained for the damper was found to be greater than the value of 1.5 proposed by the AISC. Equations are presented for the design of the proposed damper and the brace elements connected to the damper.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.136
Threshold uncertainty score0.352

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.224 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Structural Design of Tall and Special BuildingsSame topicSeismic Performance and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207