Effect of nonlinearity on seismic response of nonstructural components in a code-conforming RC shear wall building
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper assesses the seismic response of nonstructural components (NSCs) in a 12-storey RC office building with ductile-coupled shear walls, located in Montreal on stiff soil. A time history analysis was conducted using 24 spectrum-matched artificial earthquakes, considering both the linear and nonlinear behavior of the supporting structure and of the NSCs. The acceleration floor response spectra, the height factor, the component dynamic amplification factor and the force factor of the NSCs were evaluated at the 2nd, 6th, and 12th floors, and compared with the provisions proposed in NBC 2020, ASCE/SEI 7-22, and Eurocode 8-1. It was concluded that the nonlinear supporting structure notably reduces the seismic peak acceleration of floors, components, and force factors at selected levels. Moreover, increasing NSC ductility reduces peak spectral accelerations in the vicinity of building higher modes, and has a smaller impact on the fundamental mode. Finally, the optimal values and equations for estimating the studied force factor were 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.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".