MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6987596274

Testing of conventional construction W-shape brace members and their bolted end connections undergoing reversed cyclic loading

2019· dissertation· en· W6987596274 on OpenAlexafffundabout

Bibliographic record

VenueeScholarship@McGill (McGill) · 2019
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSeismic Performance and Analysis
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersMcMaster University
KeywordsDuctility (Earth science)BraceSeismic analysisDissipationTension (geology)Failure mode and effects analysisFuse (electrical)Seismic loadingBuckling
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Canada, the seismic design of steel structures involves the principle of capacity based design, which takes advantage of the inelastic ductility of the Seismic Force Resisting System (SFRS).Specific to concentrically braced frames, the moderate ductility (MD) and limited ductility (LD) categories both require that the members and connections in the lateral load carrying path be designed for the probable capacity of the braces in tension and compression.However, there also exists the Conventional Construction (CC) category as outlined in Clause 27.11 of the CSA S16-14 Standard, for which the engineer is allowed to waive capacity based design principles and design a SFRS which is expected to behave principally elastically when subjected to design-level earthquakes.These Type CC systems are designed using low R-values (Ro = 1.3 & Rd = 1.5), and hence do not depend on the yielding and buckling of a fuse element (brace) to dissipate earthquake energy.Instead, the energy dissipation is assumed to occur due to localized yielding of connections and through friction within these joints.The CSA S16-14 Standard requires the engineer to increase the seismic forces by a factor of 1.5, if it cannot be demonstrated that the connections in the lateral load carrying path have an expected failure mode that is ductile.This has proven to be challenging to engineers because no guidelines or recommendations are provided to determine the ductility of connections.As a result, quantifying the level of ductility of these components becomes an important factor in designing Type CC systems under seismic loading.While Type CC braced frames are used extensively throughout the country, there is very little research available to give insight on the ductility of these systems, particularly in the case of Wshaped braces with bolted end connections.As such, the objective of this research was to measure the response of full-scale W-shape braces and their bolted connections under reversed cyclic seismic loading.Six brace specimens were tested, including two common bolted connection types and two W-shape section sizes.These connections were designed following the provisions in CSA S16-14 without any capacity design rules.The 1.5 penalty from Clause 27.11 was not included.The loading protocol was developed using statistical data from a nonlinear v ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS First and foremost, I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my two supervisors,

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.202 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeScholarship@McGill (McGill)Same topicSeismic Performance and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207