Comparison between structural configurations designed by steel shear wall, moment resistant frame and X shape bracing systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nowadays, in order to increase construction of tall structures, the importance of choosing optimum systems, with a huge energy absorption capacity against wind and earthquake loads, has been widely considered. Since four decades ago, steel shear walls had been used as a stiff and high performance lateral system. This study is about the effect of concrete filled steel tubes (CFT) columns as vertical boundary elements of steel shear wall on seismic behavior of steel structures. Due to do this, three 10-storey steel structures, with similar plans and lateral load career systems of steel shear wall, coinciding X-bracing, and moderate steel frame were analyzed by means of non-linear, time-history method through SAP2000 software, and the results of roof displacement of them were compared with each other. Also after validating a two-storey, single-span frame sample with steel shear walls and CFT columns, 3 single-storey structures were analyzed by means of hysteresis and pushover, through ABAQUS software. The results of this study showed that a shear wall system presents suitable stiffness, resistance and ductility in comparison with other lateral bearing systems.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".