Prevention of Disproportionate Collapse for Multistory Mass Timber Buildings: Review of Current Practices and Recent Research
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The expanding height of multistory mass timber buildings makes the development of guidance to prevent disproportionate collapse an increasingly important area of engineering design; however, there is no guidance available in building codes or design standards on how to prevent disproportionate collapse of multistory mass timber buildings. In this paper, practical project-specific solutions applied in constructed prominent multistory mass timber buildings to prevent disproportionate collapse are presented. Various approaches have been successfully used for different construction types of multistory mass timber buildings to decrease the potential risk of disproportionate collapse, such as using walls above supports as deep beams and using columns to carry tension forces and hold the floor below in case a supporting column or wall is damaged. Then, recent and ongoing research in the field of prevention of disproportionate collapse of multistory timber buildings is reviewed. Such research is mostly based on numerical simulations of element removal scenarios and pushdown experiments on floor systems and connections and provides valuable insights and guidance to designers on important structural aspects regarding the prevention of disproportionate collapse in multistory mass timber buildings. Finally, the draft provisions for an upcoming standard related to the prevention of disproportionate collapse are reviewed, and the conclusions regarding the state of the art are presented.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 it