Comparison of frequency- and time-domain analyses for guyed masts in turbulent winds
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
Both frequency- and time-domain methods have been employed in the dynamic analysis of guyed telecommunication masts subjected to turbulent winds. Although the probabilistic frequency-domain approach offers some advantages in terms of its relative ease of implementation and in the statistical reliability of wind load descriptions, the deterministic time-domain method permits a more realistic treatment of system nonlinearities. In this study, a numerical investigation was undertaken to compare frequency- and time-domain dynamic response predictions for a selected guyed mast in gusty winds. Two different analysis techniques were employed, with the frequency-domain calculations performed using response influence lines and the time-domain analyses carried out using a stiffness-based finite element model. Good agreement was observed in root-mean-square and peak dynamic response estimates after compensation was included for differences in turbulence intensity levels assumed in the two models. In general, natural frequencies and mode shapes were also similar.Key words: guyed mast, dynamic analysis, wind, turbulence, nonlinear behaviour, finite element analysis, cables, frequency domain, time domain.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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