Seismic design criteria for CFS steel-sheathed shear walls
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The current European earthquake standard EN1998-1 does not provide the seismic design criteria for cold formed steel (CFS) steel-sheathed shear walls, limiting their use as a lateral force resisting system in lightweight steel buildings. In order to overcome this lack of guidelines, a specific study has been performed to extend the applicability of the Effective Strip Method (ESM), given in North American standard AISI S400 to EN1998-1. The method evaluates the shear resistance of steel-sheathed shear walls and it is permitted only in USA & Mexico as an alternative to tabulated shear resistance for predefined wall configurations. In order to further validate its scope of application, it was applied to additional available experimental results of walls tested in Canada. Only for some configurations, the ESM does not give acceptable predictions. Furthermore, the ESM was applied following the European approach, to make its use possible in context of European seismic design methodology. The overstrength factor for the design of non-dissipative elements was evaluated. Based on the results, it is concluded that the ESM could be appropriate for the evaluation of resistance of steel-sheathed shear walls in Eurocodes.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".