Impact of changes in the NBCC 2005 seismic provisions on the design of restraints for OFCs and essential rigid components
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The seismic design provisions in the NBCC 2005 are based on an earthquake hazard level higher than \nthat used for the NBCC 1995 provisions, which involves an increase in the seismic design accelerations. \nThis paper presents the main results of a study of the impact of the increase in accelerations on the \nseismic design of rigid non-structural components such as transformer tanks, reservoirs, emergency \npower generators, etc., and their foundations or restraints. The provisions of the 1995 and 2005 editions of \nNBCC for equipment located above grade level and for the calculation of base shear forces of low-rise \nbuildings or control units for essential equipment having different lateral load resisting systems of limited \nductility are presented as well. In order to get a global conclusion about the behaviour of rigid components, \nthe analysis has been made in relation with different earthquake records.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".